This is true. However, this non-rejection didn't result in a doctrinal stance. Confessional Lutherans don't view it as a theological issue for obvious reasons.
xone:
Thanks for the honest answer and while Luther did not put it into the “Ausburg[sic]” Confession, he still never refuted it.
Perhaps Luther, and Calvin for that matter, did not reject it because it was so well taught during the period of the early Church.
With respect to Mary’s perpetual Virginity, there was no orthodox Church Father, Bishop of Church Council that interpreted the NT in way that led to the conclusion that Mary had any other children besides Christ. In fact, as early as Origen [185-254], in his commentary on the Gospel of Matthew states that Mary was ever-virgin and the tradition that was passed down was that the brothers and sisters of Jesus were Joseph’s children by another woman as again, nowhere does it state that Mary was their Mother. Other Fathers, such as St. Hillary of Potiers in the 4th century in the Latin Church in reflecting on the Gospel of St. John clearly saw when Christ told the Apostle John to behold “Your Mother” and for the Apostle John to “behold your mother” as evidence that Mary had no other children and that John, as the Apostle who Christ loved, was to take care of Mary until she passed [that was also clearly laid out in the canons of the COuncil of Ephesus in 431AD, if my memory serves me correct]
Even before Origen’s time, St. Irenaus in his work “Against Heresies [circa 175 AD]” refers to Mary as “Mary the Virgin” and before that, St. Justin Marytr in his work Dialogue with Trypho [circa 155AD] refers to Mary as the “Virgin Mary” and St. Ignatius of Antioch in his Letter to the Church at Ephesus [circa 107AD] speaks of the Virginity of Mary.
Now, it is interesting for the Fathers of the 2nd century to describe someone as a “Virgin” if they were not one as that is a “binary” description [either one is a Virgin or not, there really is no neutral ground here]. One could refer to Mary as something other than “Virgin” and still maintain the doctrine of the “Virgin Birth” by clearly stating Mary conceived Christ by the Power of the Holy Spirit. So what we have is clear teaching from Apostolic Tradition from a large consensus of the Church Fathers affirming the perpetual virginity of Mary.
So the notion of Mary as ever-virgin was well established in the 2nd/3rd century. As we move to the 4th century, we see more clear statements from all the orthodox Church Fathers of the West and East. For example, St. Athanasius [295-373] in his work “Discourse against the Arians{360AD}” speaks of Mary as “ever-virgin.” St. Gregory of Nysaa [335-396] in his work “Virginity {370AD}” speaks of Mary and her perpetual virginity. St. Ephiphanius of Salamis [315-402] in his work “The Well Anchored Man {374AD}” speaks of Mary as the “Holy and Ever Virgin Mary”. St Gregory of Nazianz in his work “Oratation on Holy Lights {381AD}”speaks or Mary as the “Virgin Mary”
St. Ambrose of Milan in his work “The consecration of a virgin and the Perpetual Virginity of Mary” written in 392AD is a treatise defending Mary’s perpetual virginity.
St. Jerome [347-420] writing against the heretic Helvidius “blasts him” for proposing Mary was not ever-Virgin and Helvidius reliance on Tertullian, who had left Catholic Orthodoxy for the Montanist heretical group is clearly articulated by Jerome that Tertullian’s embracing of the Montanist meant he was no longer a man of the Church. Jerome also clearly states, nowhere in Sacred Scripture do we ever read that Mary had other children.
St. Augustine’s writings [354-430] are filled with statements affirming Mary’s perpetual virginity. Some examples here will suffice. First, in his Sermons [391-430] he speaks of Mary as “Virgin conceiving, Virgin bearing, Virgin pregnant, Virgin bringing forth, and Virgin-perpetual”. Second, in a work entitled “On Virginity” written circa 401 AD, he writes in reference to Christ and Mary that in being born of a Virgin, who chose to remain a virgin, Christ wished to affirm Virginity without imposing it. Finally, in another work entitled “Heresies” written in 420 AD, he writes “heretics called Antidicomarities are those who contradict the perpetual virginity of Mary and affirm that after Christ was born she was joined with her husband”.
St. Cyril of Alexandria writing around the time of the Council of Ephesus (431AD) in a work entitled “Against those who do Not wish to confess that the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God” writes that Christ kept his Mother a Virgin even after her child-bearing, which was done for none of the other saints”
So while the need to Define Mary as the Mother of God resulted in that being clearly dogmatized at the Council of Ephesus, as it related to a Christological heresy [Nestorianism], the clear teaching of the Church Fathers on the perpetual virginity of Mary was so well taught that it was never challenged that it needed to be hammered out at a Council, although it is clear the Council of Ephesus in using the title of “Holy Virgin” clearly is a dogmatic statement implicit in the Council of Ephesus 431AD.
In closing, perhaps Luther and Calvin were well versed enough in Church History and the Fathers to realize that the only groups to challenge Mary’s perpetual virginity were the Anticicomarites that St. Augustine referred to [the name literally means against-Mary] and that sect evolved from the Ebionities, a 2nd century sort of Gnostic sect that ST. Ireneaus wrote against and folks like Tertullian in his Montanist period and Helvidius who St. Jerome wrote against.
So while Luther and Calvin did not put Mary’s perpetual virginity into their respective Confessions, they nevertheless did not refute Mary’s perpetual virginity. The rejection of Mary’s perpetual virginity is an even more recent event and novelty.
Once again, thanks for your honesty on the subject