Do a virgin birth and perfect knowledge make Jesus less human? Or Mary less a mother? [Ecumenical]

New Theological Movement ^ | 1/1/2012 | Father Ryan Erlenbush

[markomalley]

Christ’s birth “did not diminish his mother’s virginal integrity but sanctified it.” (CCC 499; Lumen Gentium [Vatican II], 57)

The knowledge and love of our Divine Redeemer, of which we were the object from the first moment of His Incarnation, exceed all the human intellect can hope to grasp. For hardly was He conceived in the womb of the Mother of God, when He began to enjoy the beatific vision, and in that vision all the members of His Mystical Body were continually and unceasingly present to Him, and He embraced them with His redeeming love. (Pius XII, Mystici Corporis 75)

The Church teaches that Christ was miraculously born of a Virgin without causing his Mother any of the pains associated with labor. Further, the Catholic Church believes that our Savior knew all created things from the first moment of his Incarnation such that he even knew (for example) how to speak every language that had or ever would exist.

When some people hear of these doctrines, they have a tendency to respond: “But then Jesus wouldn’t be truly human! And Mary wouldn’t be a real mother!” Let us consider the foolishness of such a reaction.

Mary was a virgin during birth

There can be no doubt that the Church teaches that Jesus was miraculously born of Mary, her virginal integrity remaining wholly intact and unharmed. Mary was not merely a virgin before and after birth, but even “in birth” she remained a virgin – hence, “virginity” refers not merely to refraining from sexual pleasures but also to the physical and biological enclosure of Mary’s sealed womb. Christ came forth from Mary after the manner by which he walked through the walls of the sealed upper room after his Resurrection – he comes forth from his Mother as thought from intellect and as light through glass.

For a fuller explanation of this dogma, see our earlier article wherein many references are given [here].

Christ knew all created truths from the first moment of his conception

The Lord Jesus knew all things (that is, all that man can possibly know) both through the beatific vision (the union he had with the Father) and through infused knowledge (given by the working of the Holy Spirit). Our Savior was never ignorant, nor did he ever make a mistake in judgment. And, although he did gain knowledge through sense experience, we affirm that he already knew everything from the moment of his conception by virtue of the beatific vision – thus, he knew all things in his humanity (i.e. in his human intellect), though not necessarily from his humanity (i.e. through sense experience).

For a fuller explanation of this dogma, see our earlier article complete with many citations and references [here].

Jesus Christ is true God and true man

We confess that one and the same Christ, Lord, and only-begotten Son, is to be acknowledged in two natures without confusion, change, division or separation. The distinction between the natures was never abolished by their union, but rather the character proper to each of the two natures was preserved as they came together in one person (prosopon) and one hypostasis. (CCC 467, Council of Chalcedon [DS 302])

At the Incarnation, humanity was not absorbed into divinity, but was personally united to the divine nature. Thus, both natures (human and divine) remain unmixed and unconfused. However, neither are they separate or divided – for they are truly united.

Jesus was not “just a man”, nor was he “just God” – rather, he is both man and God. Neither is there a part of Jesus which is man and a part which is God; but he is fully man and fully God. Whenever we speak of Jesus, we speak of the God-man and of the single divine Persons who is God the Son. The Eternal Word is the sole subject of both natures, there is not a human person but only one divine Person – hence, whatever we predicate of Jesus is predicated of the Eternal Son of the Father.

Is a painful birth required in order to be truly human?

Some will say that (if Jesus was born miraculously of Mary, without causing her any pain, but coming forth from her womb as light through glass and as thought from intellect) then Jesus wouldn’t be truly human. Some will say, “I  feel separated from Christ if he didn’t share in the painful (and bloody) birth which is common to the human race. Then he wouldn't be truly human.”

The response to this is simple: Is a child only human after birth? Shall we say that babies aren’t human when they are in the womb, but only when they are given a natural and ordinary birth?

And what about children delivered through c-section? Are they any less human for having been “born” in a way different from the ordinary mode? Further, we can mention children formed in test-tubes – are they not truly human because they do not share in the ordinary process of gestation and birth which is common to the human race?

Finally, consider the creation account – while many may not accept the historicity of this portion of Genesis (and this is not our concern here, so we set the question aside), I have never met any who claim that Adam and Eve wouldn’t truly be human for not having been born in the normal way!

Indeed, if Christ can be conceived of a virgin, he can most certainly be born of a virgin in a miraculous way. The mode of our birth has no effect whatsoever on whether or not we are truly human. Like all of us, Jesus is true man because he possessed a human nature.

Is an ordinary delivery necessary to be a true mother?

Others will say that (if Jesus came forth from Mary as thought from intellect and light through glass) the Blessed Virgin would not be a true mother. “If she didn’t go through the pains of labor,” say such persons, “then she wasn’t truly Jesus’ mother.”

We reply: Is a woman only a mother when she gives birth? Is she not a mother at the moment of conception? And what (again) of the case of a c-section – shall we say that women who go through this abnormal means of delivery are not true mothers? Further, shall we say that a test-tube baby has no mother? Of course not!

All that is required of motherhood is to provide the material necessary for generation (i.e. the egg). This is why, from the very moment of conception, Mary was the true and natural Mother of Jesus.

A miraculous birth does not negatively affect Mary’s Motherhood any more than does the miraculous and virginal conception of the Child.

Does more knowledge make a man less human?

“If Christ knew everything, then he wouldn’t be truly human”, some will say. In one, very restricted sense, there is truth to this – for, in his human intellect, it is impossible that Jesus should know and comprehend the totality of the divine Essence (i.e. the Trinity is still a mystery to Jesus in his humanity, though in his divinity he fully comprehends) and also to know all the possible worlds that God could have created.

However, when the Church teaches that Jesus was perfected in wisdom and knowledge, she means to say that our Savior knew all things past, present and future – i.e. he knew all created truths. Jesus knew you and I and all that we would ever do, and he loved us with his Sacred and human Heart.

“But,” they say, “if Jesus knew every language, he wouldn’t really be human!” How foolish this is! Does a man become less human when he learns to read Latin? Is a man less human when he gains knowledge? Of course not!

If knowledge does not make us mere men to be less human, why should it diminish the humanity of Jesus? Indeed, we may well say that knowledge perfects our humanity – insofar as, the more we know, the more elevated is our human intellect. Therefore, for Christ to be a perfect man (as he surely is), his intellect must be perfected with all the knowledge of which man is capable. If he is truly the perfect man, then Jesus must have known all things which a man can know!

Finally, regarding the knowledge of all languages, we must admit that the Apostles did not lose their humanity when filled with the Holy Spirit and given the gift of speaking in all languages – why then should we suppose that the Christ, who is perfectly filled with the Spirit, would not know all languages? Surely, if infused knowledge did dissolve the humanity of the Apostles, neither did it diminish the humanity of our Savior.

Did Jesus leave his divinity with the Father, and empty himself of the divine nature?

What is really at the heart of the modern objections to the virgin birth and the perfect knowledge of Christ is this silly idea that Jesus “left his divinity with the Father” and “emptied himself of the divine nature” when he became man. These persons try to present a merely human Jesus. This is pure heresy.

Christ our Savior is both God and man – he was not simply man on earth, just as he is not now only God in heaven. Everything that Christ did during his time on earth was the action of the God-man, the activity of the Second Person of the Most Blessed Trinity.

If Jesus had left his divinity with the Father, then he would not truly be Emmanuel, God-with-us. We must be on our guard against this most pernicious heresy, this perfidious blasphemy.

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

Where the Bible is silent, I am silent.

Something the Catholic Church never quite got the hang of.

[markomalley]

Where the Bible is silent, I am silent.

Chapter and verse, please?

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

Rev 22

18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

[markomalley]

So where has the Catholic Church added to the Book of the Apocalypse? Or taken away from it?

And what does that have to do with what is taught? Does your group not have preachers who expound upon how Scripture should be applied?

[smvoice]

2 Tim. 3:16,17.

"ALL SCRIPTURE is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works."

I'm with you, USOTOS. If the Bible is silent, I am silent. There is nothing to be added or taken away. If He had wanted it to be said, He would have said it in His Word of Truth.

[vladimir998]

Thank Him Jesus didn’t have your view.

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

The Bible has no more to say about whether Mary’s hymen remained intact after Jesus’ birth or perpetual virginity than it did about the sun going around the earth. And the former theory is untestable.

The Bible says only:

Mat 1

24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:

25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

In fact, if the marriage was never consummated, that is grounds for the Cathlic Church to grant an annulment (i.e. there never was a marriage.)

[markomalley]

But you did not answer my question. Nobody is attempting to add or delete anything from the Book of the Apocalypse. Therefore, your citation does not apply.

Do you have a citation that states that you should be silent where Scripture is silent?

[markomalley]

2 Tim. 3:16,17. "ALL SCRIPTURE is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works."

That is a good citation to tell me that I should not disregard any Scripture.

But it doesn't tell me to be silent where Scripture is silent.

[vladimir998]

You do realize that “this book” refers to Apocalypse only, right?

[Jack Hydrazine]

No. I just makes you Mormon! LOL!

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

Thank Him Jesus didn’t have your view.

Is that so?

Mat 15

7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,

8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.

9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

See post 13 (and the rest of Mat 15)

[goat granny]

Of course she remained a virgin during the birth...unless she was having sexual intercourse during birth. No one knows the condition of her hymen, that's silly. You lose virginity by having intercourse..anything else about it is fantasy from some males of that time...

[Tax-chick]

You and I are on the same page, goat granny, as so often happens. A virgin (male or female) who hasn’t had sex. The obsession of some men with denying a normal birth is truly bizarre. (Okay, maybe she didn’t have labor pains, if that’s important. I didn’t either, with my 6th child, although the posterior breech delivery without anesthesia was No Fun there at the end.)

This writer revealed his weirdness when he mentioned that a virgin woman hadn’t “enjoyed sexual pleasure,” as if just because a man ejaculates every time, he’s doing the woman some kind of a favor.

I wonder why none of them sees the potential theological problem with equating Jesus’s resurrected body, which did, according to Scripture, pass through walls, with His body at birth. It’s almost as if they’re saying He never had a natural human body at all.

[Iscool]

And all this knowledge of the Lord is based on ?????

[goat granny]

A friend of mine had 3 contractions and delivered her own son in bed at home...she sent her husband next door to get the neighbor and when they came running back her baby was already delivered....Men have some strange idea's don't they...who examined her for an intact hymen and what the hell does it matter anyway....much of old jewish law, like todays muslims are fanatical about that part of the human body....Some even expect to find blood on the first intercourse...yikes. muslims still do this I have been told...

Why they have to make up fairy tales is beyond me....

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

Slaughtering anybody who disagreed for over 1000 years.

They don’t cite. They only challenge, like Satan in the desert...

[Tax-chick]

When Patrick was born, the nurses kept asking, “Are you having contractions?” and I would say, “Well, I must be, right?”

If a man is going to offer his opinion on childbirth, I think he ought to be an obstetrician or obstetrical nurse.