Posted on 06/13/2011 3:57:07 PM PDT by HarleyD
One of the more controversial teachings of the Catholic church deals with the perpetual virginity of Mary. This doctrine maintains that Mary remained a virgin after the birth of Jesus and that biblical references suggesting Jesus had siblings are really references to cousins (Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 510).
As the veneration of Mary increased throughout the centuries, the vehicle of Sacred Tradition became the means of promoting new doctrines not explicitly taught in the Bible. The virginity of Mary is clearly taught in scripture when describing the birth of Jesus. But is the doctrine of her continued virginity supported by the Bible? Did Mary lose her virginity after Jesus was born? Does the Bible reveal that Mary had other children, that Jesus had brothers and sisters?
The Bible does not come out and declare that Mary remained a virgin and that she had no children. In fact, the Bible seems to state otherwise: (All quotes are from the NASB.)
• Matthew 1:24-25 - "And Joseph arose from his sleep, and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took as his wife, and kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus."
• Matthew 12:46-47 - "While He was still speaking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers were standing outside, seeking to speak to Him. And someone said to Him, "Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You."
• Matthew 13:55 - "Is not this the carpenters son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?"
• Mark 6:2-3 - "And when the Sabbath had come, He began to teach in the synagogue; and the many listeners were astonished, saying, "Where did this man get these things, and what is this wisdom given to Him, and such miracles as these performed by His hands? "Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James, and Joses, and Judas, and Simon? Are not His sisters here with us?"
• John 2:12 - "After this He went down to Capernaum, He and His mother, and His brothers, and His disciples; and there they stayed a few days."
• Acts 1:14 - "These all with one mind were continually devoting themselves to prayer, along with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers."
• 1 Cor. 9:4-5 - "Do we not have a right to eat and drink? Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?"
• Gal. 1:19 - But I did not see any other of the apostles except James, the Lords brother."
In Greek, the word for brother is adelphos and sister is adelphe. This word is used in different contexts: of children of the same parents (Matt. 1:2; 14:3), descendants of parents (Acts 7:23, 26; Heb. 7:5), the Jews as a whole (Acts 3:17, 22), etc. Therefore, the term brother (and sister) can and does refer to the cousins of Jesus.
There is certainly merit in this argument, However, different contexts give different meanings to words. It is not legitimate to say that because a word has a wide scope of meaning, that you may then transfer any part of that range of meaning to any other text that uses the word. In other words, just because the word brother means fellow Jews or cousin in one place, does not mean it has the same meaning in another. Therefore, each verse should be looked at in context to see what it means.
Lets briefly analyze a couple of verses dealing with the brothers of Jesus.
• Matthew 12:46-47, "While He was still speaking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers were standing outside, seeking to speak to Him. And someone said to Him, "Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You."
• Matthew 13:55 - "Is not this the carpenters son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?"
Psalm 69, A Messianic Psalm
There are many arguments pro and con concerning Jesus siblings. But the issue cannot be settled without examining Psalm 69, a Messianic Psalm. Jesus quotes Psalm 69:4 in John 15:25, "But they have done this in order that the word may be fulfilled that is written in their Law, they hated Me without a cause."
He also quotes Psalm 69:9 in John 2:16-17, "and to those who were selling the doves He said, "Take these things away; stop making My Fathers house a house of merchandise." His disciples remembered that it was written, "Zeal for Thy house will consume me."
Clearly, Psalm 69 is a Messianic Psalm since Jesus quoted it in reference to Himself two times. The reason this is important is because of what is written between the verses that Jesus quoted.
To get the whole context, here is Psalm 69:4-9, "Those who hate me without a cause are more than the hairs of my head; Those who would destroy me are powerful, being wrongfully my enemies, What I did not steal, I then have to restore. 5O God, it is Thou who dost know my folly, And my wrongs are not hidden from Thee. 6May those who wait for Thee not be ashamed through me, O Lord God of hosts; May those who seek Thee not be dishonored through me, O God of Israel, 7Because for Thy sake I have borne reproach; Dishonor has covered my face. 8I have become estranged from my brothers, and an alien to my mothers sons. 9For zeal for Thy house has consumed me, And the reproaches of those who reproach Thee have fallen on me."
This messianic Psalm clearly shows that Jesus has brothers. As Amos 3:7 says, "Surely the Lord God does nothing unless He reveals His secret counsel to His servants the prophets." Gods will has been revealed plainly in the New Testament and prophetically in the Old. Psalm 69 shows us that Jesus had brothers.
Did Mary have other children? The Bible seems to suggest yes. Catholic Tradition says no. Which will you trust?
Of course, the Catholic will simply state that even this phrase "my mother's sons" is in reference not to his siblings, but to cousins and other relatives. This is a necessary thing for the Catholic to say, otherwise, the perpetual virginity of Mary is threatened and since that contradicts Roman Catholic tradition, an interpretation that is consistent with that tradition must be adopted.
The question is, "Was Jesus estranged by His brothers?". Yes, He was. John 7:5 says "For not even His brothers were believing in Him." Furthermore, Psalm 69:8 says both "my brothers" and "my mother's sons." Are these both to be understood as not referring to His siblings? Hardly. The Catholics are fond of saying that "brothers" must mean "cousins." But, if that is the case, then when we read "an alien to my mother's sons" we can see that the writer is adding a further distinction and narrowing the scope of meaning. In other words, Jesus was alienated by his siblings, His very half-brothers begotten from Mary.
It is sad to see the Roman Catholic church go to such lengths to maintain Mary's virginity, something that is a violation of biblical law to be married and fill the earth.
Yes, Mary had other children. Mary was the earthly mother of the Christ child, but she was no mother to you nor me.
With so much Biblical validation for this, the question is, why would anyone attempt to dispute it, or even want to? The answer is as simple as the word 'tradition'. It is because these scriptures directly contradict Roman Catholic tradition which glorifies Mary as a perpetual virgin, Co-Redemptrix, and Mediatrix. If this church were to confess that the scripture is correct and Mary had other children, it would destroy their well oiled myths about Mary. Therefore, a way had to be devised which would justify this teaching... When we carefully consider the Biblical record, the question itself seems quite ridiculous, because it is so clear even from the context of many of the scriptures that He did. The only major religion that chooses to dispute this is the Roman Catholic religion. Roman Catholicism dogmatically maintain that following the Lord's birth, Mary continued in her virginity the rest of her life and never bore any more children. This in direct contradiction to everything in scripture which shows that though Joseph and Mary did not come together before Jesus was born, they did afterward, and the Lord indeed blessed them with Children.
The usual errors from the same suspect for the same superstitious, tyrannical reasons.
” .. . rather than accepting what has been Christian knowledge for two thousands years.”
And, not that it should matter to Christians and Jews, that knowledge also reflects even older, or at least independent, tenets of natural law.
Other than the difficulties of traveling with a very pregnant woman so no attention for a bunch of rowdy kids along to the census accessor, I have no idea. The same quandry would apply for the story of Jesus at 12 getting left behind at the Temple ... no other children are mentioned in that story either.
Mary and Joseph were ‘doing it’
What the heck is the problem with that, that it deserves 2 thousands years of speculation?
Some faiths lose their freaking minds at the thought of Mary EVER having sexual relations with her husband.
I may be wrong, but didn’t the Bible mention that Joseph didn’t (or was prohibited to) have relations with Mary until after Jesus was born?
A most excellent point! I had forgotten the wording of that passage.
Jesus’ instructions to John to take care of Mary, as his mother, upon his crucifixion seem to imply that Mary had no other children.
Also... with 5 children in on the discipleship game with Jesus. How is there no role for Joseph, their father on earth, in their formation and ministry?
Neither all of those poor "schucks" or the painfully ignorant anti-Catholics who troll these threads define Church dogma and doctrine.
Within the Catholic Church celibacy is not the rule for all Catholic priests. For Eastern Rite Catholics, married priests are the norm, just as they are for Orthodox and Oriental Christians. Within some rites married men can become priests, but single priests cannot marry.
For about the last 1,000 years the rule of the Latin-Rite (Roman) Church has been for priests as well as bishops to take vows of celibacy. This is to ensure that the attention and priorities of the clergy are not divided between a personal family and the needs of his flock. Even today, though, exceptions are made. For example, there are married Latin-Rite priests who are converts from Lutheranism and Episcopalianism. Please.
Scripture that states this?
Hoss
Scripture that states this?
Hoss
If the author had read the New Testament in the original Greek, he would see that his interpretations/translations are clearly incorrect.
“The only major religion that chooses to dispute this is the Roman Catholic religion. Roman Catholicism dogmatically maintain that following the Lord’s birth, Mary continued in her virginity the rest of her life and never bore any more children. This in direct contradiction to everything in scripture which shows that though Joseph and Mary did not come together before Jesus was born, they did afterward, and the Lord indeed blessed them with Children.”
So let me get this straight. The Roman Catholic Church, which, incidentally, was the sole custodian of both Biblical Testaments for 1500 years, and made no changes in those testaments in the following 500+ years, deliberately established and purveyed a “tradition” which contradicted those texts? I don’t think so.
And, btw, the RC Church has never taught that Mary, honored and exalted as her position is, is a co-redemptrix.
Behold thy Mother. We are all her children.
Nice of you to critique your post for us to save us the time.
Thanks. Good to hear from you.
I don't know much about Catholicism but I doubt that Catholics "worship" anybody but the Lord. To worship anybody but the Lord clearly goes against the first and second commandments, which I believe are the same for Catholics as for every other Christian.
The Church Christ established on earth was sustained years and years (through Sacred Tradition) before any Gospels or NT matter were written.
I think part of this is the political fallout that would occur if Mary wasn't a virgin forever. If Mary is thought of as the spouse of the Holy Spirit she would be committing adultery if she had carnal relations with Joseph. Of course the idea of Mary being a spouse of God is greco-roman paganism. The desire to have a "suitable background story" is just the desire of a body of believers trying to "mainstream" Christianity.
We see Mary identified in Scripture by Jesus Christ as woman. Paul called her woman. In the early Christian Church she was called "suitable vessel" by Ignatius. Then the heresy started creeping in when Justin Martyr called her "new Eve" followed by Irenaeus calling her "advocate" and then "Mother of God" by Origen. All in the span of 200 years.
Really. I see no mention of bishop, priest, pastor, abbot cleric, etc., etc. But I’m supposing you’re telling me that these words are *understood* when “preacher” or “apostle” or “teacher” is used. Guess you’re telling me, too, that maybe “brother” means something other than full sibling because the Bible tends to use words figuratively, loosely, indeterminately.
Celebrate Passover Seder each year. The plain reading of that statement would mean:
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.