First, why I used to disbelieve in the perpetual virginity of Mary: I wrote a paper in 1997 while at seminary on it where I concluded that it was based on the Protoevangelium of James (ca 150 AD). Origen, if read in particular way, it led me to conclude that. Closer examination of Origin led to conclude I was reading Origin wrong but he did capture a moment in time…
Here’s a small part of why I now believe in the Perpetual Virginity of Mary. It is a much longer answer and took many, many years of working through the issue. These reasons may not be sufficient for other people but if it’s a stumbling block keeping people from the Church it’s worth grappling with the issues.
1 – The Protoevangelium of James (PoJ) is very early (150 AD) but preserves an older tradition which was already accepted in the Church that Mary was Ever Virgin. This contrasts the PoJ to other birth stories which the Church rejected. The historical fact that the Church adopted parts of the PoJ in the Liturgy, but not others, demonstrates the universal acceptance of key parts of the story.
2 – The clear historical witness is that only heretics rejected the Perpetual Virginity, and they were small in number. They were soundly answered by Church apologists in their day. I do not want to be numbered among the heretics, but in the Church. The heretics have no historical continuity in the Church – they came and went but the teaching of the Church remained. The phrase “Ever-Virgin” is used in the Liturgy of St John Chrysostom seven times demonstrating it was universally accepted and remained so up until a later part of the Reformation.
3 – There are certain types of vows that are taken by both men AND women of consecration in the Old Testament. The Nazarite Vow is one such example (Numbers 6:2). This is attested in the case of a woman in other historical writing.
“Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When either man or woman shall separate themselves to vow a vow of a Nazarite, to separate themselves unto the LORD:”
4 – The one who was to bear God the Son was in the Holy of Holies, the place that was understood to be the dwelling place of God in the Old Testament. Mary was sealed in the temple at age 3 and remained there until her puberty was about to begin. Staying in the temple would have been an act of ritual defilement of the temple. It would have also been a witness to the people of Israel who would have known about it.
5 – Joseph took in Mary as his betrothed – a legal status of protector and her continued virginity. Joseph was chosen for this task by a process well known to all to be the one to do this task. All the older widowers were part of this process. After Mary bore Jesus, they were married to protect her from slander.
6 – The Church was VERY protective of Mary. After all, if the Jews killed Jesus, they’d have no restraint from killing the first Christian and greatest witness to Him, Mary. That is a good explanation of why there are very few things about Mary in the Gospels and Acts. The Gospel texts were to tell the world about Jesus. The role of Mary was preserved in Church tradition to protect her safety.
7 – The brothers and sisters of Jesus were from Joseph’s wife who had died previously. At the cross, Jesus was entrusted to the Apostle John for her protection. If they were Mary’s children, she would have been protected by her son(s). The fact that James, the step-brother of Jesus, was a very important part of the early church, but not given as the protector of Mary for the rest of her life is problematic to the idea that Mary was his mother.
8 – The story of Hannah and Samuel is a foreshadow of the presentation of Mary to the temple. Under the Law, the firstborn was either to be dedicated to the Lord or a sacrifice was to be offered. Samuel was brought to the temple and served as a faithful priest in the midst of great corruption. The key difference is that Mary could not stay in the temple or serve as a priest so when she was approaching puberty she had to leave.
9 – The idea that Mary was Ever-Virgin is no less absurd (using human wisdom) than the idea that a virgin can bear a son. Both are miraculous events and are historically improbable so it should not be rejected on that basis.
10 – The hyper-critical historical method is problematic at best. The idea that something can only be true if it can be shown that there are textual or archaeological examples of something as precedence is destructive and has been falsified so many times in the past that it should not be trusted.
11 – Even the early Reformers believed in the Perpetual Virginity. Only as the Protestants started reviving ancient heresies was the teaching doubted. And it’s plain where that has led.
Once the key is unlocked to this subject many Scriptures become unveiled for me that I could not grasp without this knowledge.
Leave a Reply