Monday, April 14, 2008

Blessed Mary Ever-Virgin

And now a not-so-succinct presentation on the legitimacy of the doctrine of the Perpetual Virginity of the Mother of Jesus Christ. I apologise in advance for the terribly lengthy collection of thoughts and ideas herein contained. I pray these thoughts will be useful to you and helpful as you form your own mind on this important subject.

For Anglicans, the theologumenon, or theological opinion, that the Blessed Virgin Mary was a Virgin 'before, during and after' (to quote Saint Augustine) the conception and birth of Our Lord, is not held to be an absolutely necessary dogma of the Catholic Faith, to be held definitely, de fide tenenda, that is, for salvation as pertaining to the essence of the Faith of the Scriptures and Creeds. Anglicans who do not believe in the Perpetual Virginity of Our Lady are still considered to be practising Catholic Christians in good standing and in full communion with the Church. Never fear! Having said that, however, it must be asserted quite honestly that the onus of responsibility and burden of proof lie with those who reject the doctrine to demonstrate that the belief should not be held as an edifying and congruous article of Faith and that it is not actually part of the Apostolic Tradition inherited from the earliest Church and, additionally, an ancient and universally-accepted belief related directly to the Creeds themselves. The doctrine was so important for earlier generations of Christians that even Martin Luther, John Calvin, Huldrych Zwingli and John Wesley all continued to believe in the Perpetual Virginity of the Holy Virgin, even as they began and promoted their various reformations. Historically, classical magisterial proetstantism professed the Perpetual Virginity. The doctrine was never seriously questioned, even by protestants, until the advent of modern biblical scholarship and criticism, the so-called 'historical-critical' method of biblical interpretation. Anglicans who adhere to belief in Blessed Mary Ever-Virgin keep very good company indeed. In short, I should say that although Anglicans don't strictly have to believe it, they should.

Here are a few splendid examples of the early protestant orthodoxy on this question:

Martin Luther

'Christ, our Saviour, was the real and natural fruit of Mary's virginal womb. This was without the cooperation of a man, and she remained a virgin after that.' Sermons on John, chaps. 1-4 (1539)

'Christ was the only Son of Mary, and the Virgin Mary bore no children besides Him. I am inclined to agree with those who declare that 'brothers' really mean 'cousins' here, for Holy Writ and the Jews always call cousins brothers.' Sermons on John, chaps. 1-4 (1539)

'A new lie about me is being circulated. I am supposed to have preached and written that Mary, the mother of God, was not a virgin either before or after the birth of Christ.' That Jesus Christ was Born a Jew (1523)

'Scripture does not say or indicate that she later lost her virginity. When Matthew says that Joseph did not know Mary carnally until she had brought forth her son, it does not follow that he knew her subsequently; on the contrary, it means that he never did know her. This babble is without justification; he has neither noticed nor paid any attention to either Scripture or the common idiom.' That Jesus Christ was Born a Jew (1523)

John Calvin

'Helvidius displayed excessive ignorance in concluding that Mary must have had many sons, because Christ's 'brothers' are sometimes mentioned.' Harmony of Matthew, Mark & Luke, sec. 39 (Geneva, 1562)

'The inference he [Helvidius] drew from it was, that Mary remained a virgin no longer than till her first birth, and that afterwards she had other children by her husband. No just and well-grounded inference can be drawn from these words; as to what took place after the birth of Christ. He is called 'first-born'; but it is for the sole purpose of informing us that he was born of a virgin. What took place afterwards the historian does not inform us. No man will obstinately keep up the argument, except from an extreme fondness for disputation.'
(ibid.)

'Under the word 'brethren' the Hebrews include all cousins and other relations, whatever may be the degree of affinity.' Commentary on John (7:3)

Huldrych Zwingli

'To deny that Mary remained inviolata before, during and after the birth of her Son, is to doubt the omnipotence of God, and it is right and profitable to repeat the angelic greeting - not prayer - 'Hail Mary.' God esteemed Mary above all creatures, including the saints and angels - it is her purity, innocence and invincible faith that mankind must follow.' This is from the Fidei expositio, the last pamphlet from his pen. There is a special insistence upon the perpetual virginity of Mary. The Perpetual Virginity of Mary, September 17, 1522

Zwingli printed in 1524 a sermon on 'Mary, ever virgin, mother of God': 'I have never thought, still less taught, or declared publicly, anything concerning the subject of the ever Virgin Mary, Mother of our salvation, which could be considered dishonourable, impious, unworthy or evil. I believe with all my heart according to the word of holy gospel that this pure virgin bore for us the Son of God and that she remained, in the birth and after it, a pure and unsullied virgin, for eternity.'


John Wesley

I believe Jesus Christ was born of the blessed Virgin, who, as well after as she brought him forth, continued a pure and unspotted virgin.' 'Letter to a Roman Catholic'

The vast majority of Christians living and dead have held and do hold that the Blessed Mother was preserved in her physical dignity, integrity and chastity the unique and singular human agent of the Incarnation. The doctrine is unquestionably part of what we call the consensus fidelium, the whole faith of the whole People of God, the universal, ancient and consentient belief of the whole Church in every time, place and age. The consensus of the Church's greatest Saints, Doctors, Confessors, theologians, teachers and witnesses has always been that the Perpetual Virginity is a genuine teaching of the Gospel. That puts Anglicans who might dissent in a tight spot!

The theological reason why the Church understood from the beginning the history of salvation and the content of Holy Scripture as teaching that the Blessed Mother is Ever-Virgin is the recognition that authentic belief in the Divinity of Our Blessed Lord is intimately connected to, and quite inseparable from, a right belief about the role and ministry of His Mother. The Creeds canonise the title 'Virgin' for the Theotokos, clearly implying as a dogmatic statement of fact that Mary remained a Virgin after Our Lord's miraculous conception and birth. If Mary had had natural marital relations with Saint Joseph and had conceived and birthed other children, the permanent title 'the Virgin Mary' would make little historical or theological sense. The Helvidian doctrine would have necessitated such language as 'Mary who was the Virgin.' Why would Mary remain a Virgin? To remain forever a living testimony in her bodily chastity to the unique Deity of Jesus Christ as the only-begotten Son of God. In the Incarnation, Mary became not only an instrument or channel for God the Son, in which and through which He became Man: in the miracle of the Incarnation Mary became God's Mother, the Temple and Throne of God. Her sacred body, and her life, would remain the utterly unique means by which God became Man - Christ having consecrated and sanctified Our Lady's body by His presence in her womb. Out of reverence for her, for the mystery of the Incarnation, and for the received interpretation of the Gospel narratives, the Church has always called Mary aeiparthenos, Ever-Virgin. As Father Alexander Schemmann, the famous twentieth-century Orthodox theologian once quipped when a student challenged the Perpetual Virginity, 'What? Do you think the Blessed Virgin was bored with God?' His point was well taken, and it still is today! Mary gave her life, body and soul, totally to Jesus – and that is the heart meaning of the Ever-Virginity.

The biblical data tells us, if read within the Tradition of the Church, that Mary was the unique Mother of the unique Son, and so the Church ever held until modern times. The strongest evidence in the New Testament regarding the ongoing virginal state of Our Lady is Saint John 19, where we read that the beloved disciple, Saint John, took the Blessed Mother into his home to care for her upon the death of the Lord. The Lord commended Mary to the care and guardianship of John. If Our Lord had had other natural brothers and sisters born of the Blessed Mother, Jewish Law and custom, the goel tradition, would have required Him to commend His Mother to the care and safekeeping of His own blood siblings. The fact that Our Lord did not commend the Virgin to one or more of His brothers or sisters illustrates the fact that He did not have any to whom He could give His Mother, and so the Church has ever held. The references to the 'brothers and sisters' of Jesus in the New Testament have been understood in basically three different ways, only one of which has been deemed heretical by the Fathers of the Church.

1. The teaching of Helvidius and Jovinian: This doctrine is the modern protestant view, condemned as heretical by Saint Augustine of Hippo and Saint Jerome, which understands the references to the 'brothers and sisters' of Jesus Christ in the literal sense as biological children of Blessed Mary and Saint Joseph, and hence biological brothers and sisters of Jesus. This interpretation of Scripture was held to be entirely novel, and erroneous, by the Church of the fourth century.

2. The teaching of Saint Jerome: Saint Jerome, the biblical expert thoroughly familiar with Jewish tradition and history, as well as Hebrew literary styles and forms, instructs that the references to Our Lord's sisters and brothers are in truth references to blood relations of Our Lord, members of His extended family who are not biological children of Mary and Joseph. Hebrew terminology lacks a specific word for a cousin or more distant relation, and so the New Testament utilises the Greek word adelphos, 'brother', to describe a biological brother or a cousin, a relative in the family unit. Saint Jerome's biblical exegesis takes into account the Hebraicism of the New Testament. Saint Jerome's version is the view usually maintained in the Roman Catholic Church.

3. The teaching of Saint Epiphanius of Salamis: This venerated fourth-century monk and theologian of the Eastern Church asserts that the ancient tradition reveals the brothers and sisters of Jesus to be children of Saint Joseph sired by him in a previous marriage. Ancient Christian traditions describe Saint Joseph, the guardian and foster father of Our Lord, as a much older person than the Blessed Virgin, which explains his rather brief appearance in the Gospel narratives and his quick disappearance from the story of Our Lord and His Mother. Saint Epiphanius teaches that Saint Joseph married earlier in life and had children by his first wife, who later died. Saint Joseph was then called to marry the Blessed Virgin in order to protect her and her Divine Son. The brothers and sisters of Jesus are therefore held to be the step-brothers and step-sisters of Jesus, children of Saint Joseph but not of the Blessed Virgin. Saint Epiphanius' doctrine is today generally held in the Eastern Orthodox Churches.

Whatever the specific historical situation may have been, the Undivided Catholic Church, without elaborating the precise relationships in the Lord's extended family, proclaimed the Perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Virgin a dogmatic truth at the Fifth Ecumenical Council of Constantinople II in AD 553. Before that time the doctrine was proclaimed a truth of the Gospel by a multiplicity of local and regional synods and councils of the Church Catholic, such as the Synod of Rome in AD 340. All of the ancient apostolic Churches descending from the Undivided Church of the first millennium, with the possible exception of the Anglican Church, dogmatically profess that the Blessed Virgin was the only Mother of her only Son, Jesus Christ our Lord: the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Assyrian and Old Catholic Churches all maintain the doctrine as part of the deposit of faith.

As I am sure you can tell by now, I am one of those driven Anglo-Catholics who indeed believe, with the rest of the historic Church, that the Blessed Virgin Mary is the Virgin, before, during and after the birth of Our Saviour. Thank you so very much for your extraordinary patience in persisting with me to the end of this meandering letter. You are most gracious and kind to read all of this. I only hope the perspective exhibited in this dossier will assist you in your Christian pilgrimage of faith. I always certainly welcome your reflections and feedback.

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

I know this has nothing to do with this particular post, but I thought you might find this essay interesting: http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/article.php3?id_article=2200

Anonymous said...

The question of Mary's ever-virginity was not in issue at Constantinople II (553). Thus, I think it would be more accurate to say that, at an Ecumenical Council, the Church used the appellation "ever virgin" regarding Mary. In sum, this would mean that such appellation is a very pious opinion and certainly true as a matter of historical fact, but not an Article of Faith or dogma requiring profession. The Creed says "Virgin Mary," not ever-Virgin Mary, and nothing essential to the coherence of the Gospel turns on ever-virginity. Hence, membership in the Church does not require a confession of Mary's ever-virginity.

Still, your post is an excellent ex posse regarding why the Church (including the Magisterial Reformers!) does proclaim that not only was Christ born of the Virgin Mary, but also that Mary remained ever-virgin as a pious opinion (theologunomen) not to be disputed without great temerity.

For thos wanting a strong historical account, just refer to the proto-Evangelon of James, part of the New Testament Apocrapha that did not make the Canon but which has nevertheless been regarded as historically true by the Church Catholic: Joseph was an especially pious, elderly widower, who literally drew the short straw and had to took the just post-pubescent Mary into his household when see had to leave the Temple due to her maturation. This was done under the guise of betrothal -- even though Joseph was probably some four score in years and Mary well under a score, and despite the presence of Joseph's adult, married sons -- because adoption was either not an available or sufficient legal option at that time.

In any event, the appellation Ever-Virgin is not some later-day Orthodox or Catholic innovation, but is historically ground in documents of the second century (portions of which appear in Luke's Gospel), has the universal acclamation of the Fifth Counsel, and the approval of the Magisterial Reformers! It is perhaps the best attested non-dogmatic fact in the history of the Christian Church!

Anonymous said...

Excellent. Thank you especially for the references to the Reformer's and Evangelist's positions.

In your studies have you seen references to the idea that the Virgin's birth-giving was related to the original ideal of birth-giving before the fall and the curse of Gen 3? IOW, is St. Mary's birth-giving a gracious return to the original, un-cursed humanity?

Blessings to you.
Brad+

Anonymous said...

Fr. Chad,
Where would one turn to have a better understanding of how to practice an orthodox Anglican veneration of the Blessed Virgin? In the last year I have begun saying the Rosary, but there isn’t much of a Marian Cultus in my Parish. What readings would you recommend in helping to develop a personal devotion to the Virgin Mary and to understand the different devotions, such as Our Lady of Walsingham, Ipswich, etc?
Thank you.

The Most Reverend Chandler Holder Jones, SSC said...

Dear Death Bredon,

You are quite correct regarding the declaration of the Ecumenical Councils on the Perpetual Virginity of Our Lady: they simply assume the dogma as a given, of apostolic faith and tradition, and freely use the title in reference to the Virgin Mother: In their address to the Emperor Marcian, the Fathers of the Fourth Ecumenical Council declared: '...the fathers ... have expounded the meaning of faith for all and proclaimed accurately the blessing of the incarnation: how the mystery of the plan of salvation was prepared from on high and from the maternal womb, how the Virgin was named Mother of God for the sake of him who granted her virginity even after her pregnancy and kept her body sealed in a glorious manner, and how she is truly called Mother because of the flesh of the Lord of all things, which came from her and which she gave to him'. The Seventh Ecumenical Council declared: 'We confess that he who was incarnate of the immaculate Mother of God and ever-Virgin Mary has two natures' (Definition). And you rightly point out that the earliest extra-biblical source of the doctrine is the Protevangelium of James. It may be a pious opinion, but as you eloquently write, it is surely the only pious belief with a virtually universal authority, consent and profession of faith. God bless you!

Anselm Lewis said...

Great Article father.

www.orthodoxanglicanism.blogspot.com

Jerry S said...

Fr. Chad,

Thanks so much for this post. Growing up in a tradition, which was in most ways opposed to anything "catholic", I am still having to find my own way in many things. I have, up until now, fervently denied the doctrine of Mary's perpetual virginity; however, you have given me some new things to ponder. Be sure I will keep you posted, if you wish.

His peace to you,
Jerry
<><>

Anonymous said...

While sympathetic to the EV doctrine because of its long history and worthy advocates, what troubles me about it is how un-Hebraic it is. If we presuppose Joseph and Mary as a righteous Hebrew couple steeped in an ancient tradition that viewed conjugal love along the lines of the Song of Solomon and Exod. 21:10 (particularly as reaffirmed in 1 Cor. 7:3), then there is no a priori reason to expect Jesus' earthly parents to practice abstinence after His Nativity. Every discussion in favor of Mary's EV that I can recall conveniently forgets this Hebraic context.

Anonymous said...

Joel,

Try the Proto-Evangelon of James, which explicitly addresses the Hebreic context and explains why the very unusual arrangement of betrothing post-pubescent Mary to senior-citizen Joseph was contrived by the Temple Elders. Though not canonized in the New Testament, the Church nevertheless considered it historically accurate. Indeed, portions of Luke are simply extracts thereof.

Stephen said...

While the Protoevangelium adds significant value as 2nd century historical testimony regarding belief in the Blessed Virgin's ever-virginity (aeiparthenos), I'm not sure how authentically "Hebraic" it is. I personally think it's quasi-Hebraic with a strong Gentile twist. The Protoevangelium gives the tale of the Theotokos being born of Joachim and Anna in a manner similar to Samuel's birth from Hannah (note identity of names between Hannah and Anna). The parallel between the Protoevangelium and canonical Scripture is loosely maintained between Samuel's being presented, at a young age, at the sanctuary precincts to be mentored by Eli. The Protoevangelium tells the story of the toddler Mary being left at the Temple to remain their for 7-years.

However, the Protoevangelium becomes a bit fanciful (in my opinion) when it notes that the Blessed Virgin actually lived in the Holy of Holies for 7-years, and was directly fed, during that time, by the hands of an angel. This aspect of the Protoevangelium is quite hard to swallow in terms of this 2nd century work having actual value with respect to what really happened during the early years of the Virgin's life.

While I certainly affirm the ever-virginity of Mary (on the strength of Sacred Scripture and consensus of the Fathers--both of the early Church and the Reformation), I do not base confidence in this belief on the Protoevangelium.
I think this work is wisely dubbed as "apocryphal."

Stephen said...

Thanks for the study regarding Blessed Mary's ever-virginity, including quotes from some of the primary Reformers.

I was wondering if you have quotes from the Anglican Divines perhaps (Cranmer, Hooker, Jewel, Laud, Cosin, Andrewes, Thorndike, Taylor, Saravia, Bradford, Ridley, etc)? Or...could you give me a swift kick in the direction of a book or treatise that discusses the ever-virginity of the Mother of God in the writings of the Anglican Fathers?

Thanks,
-Stephen

The Comprovincial Newsletter - November 2024

The Comprovincial Newsletter - November 2024 - https://mailchi.mp/anglicanprovince.org/november2024