How the Church came to believe in Mary’s virginity during and after childbirth

Dear Father Angelo,

Could you explain to me how the Church came to believe the perpetual virginity of the Madonna (even during and after childbirth) as a truth of faith?

Which Church Fathers configured it and with what arguments?

Did the apocryphal proto-gospel of James have an influence on them, where the birth of Jesus and the confirmation of the virginity of the Madonna even after giving birth is described?

As the Feast of the Risen Christ approaches, I extend my cordial greetings to you.

Alexander

Priest’s response

Dear Alexander,

1. The doctrine on the perennial virginity of Mary developed from the fact that Mary is the Mother of God. She conceived the Son of God according to the flesh by the work of the Holy Spirit.

The data in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke on this point are explicit.

Even before the incarnation of the Word, Mary had expressed her intention to remain a virgin: how is this possible since I know not a man?

But you ask me how the thought on virginity during childbirth and after childbirth developed.

2. For virginity during childbirth

There are no explicit statements in Holy Scripture. There are, however, several very significant allusions.

1. The first is offered by Is 7,14: “The virgin will conceive and give birth”, taken from Mt 1.23. Both she who conceives and she who gives birth are virgins.

2. A second is given by Luke 2,7: “She gave birth to her firstborn son, wrapped him in swaddling clothes and laid him in a manger”. Mary’s insistence that she did everything herself is a very significant clue that her birth was not painful, but miraculous. This is the interpretation of many ancient and modern Holy Fathers and theologians.

3. I. De la Potterie also refers to John 1,13 with a singular version, as many ancient codes write, where it is stated that Jesus was generated “not dai sangui (ouk ex aimatwn), but from God” (John 1,13).

I sangui is the blood loss that a woman normally experiences when she gives birth. These, according to the biblical mentality, made the woman impure.

Then Jesus was born without shedding blood. This means that Mary gave birth to the incarnate Word in a painless birth, unaccompanied by shedding of blood.

The same belief is impressively documented in church tradition, both in the East and in the West. Already since the century II, we have the testimonies of the Protoevangelium of James (chap. 19-20), of the Ascension of Isaiah (XI,7-14), of the Odes of Solomon (19,6-10) and of Irenaeus (Adversus Haereses IV,33.11 ).

3. The testimonies of tradition are also very strong

Cyril of Jerusalem, Ambrose, the Ambrosiaster, Gregory the Great, Ildefonso of Toledo, Bede, Aimone of Halberstadt, the Glossa ordinaria… define the birth of Jesus as holy, that is, pure, uncontaminated, uncorrupted, clean, immaculate.

In other words, Jesus’ birth occurred without the loss of blood that caused ritual impurity in every woman giving birth, according to Old Testament tradition.

It is interesting to remember, then, that according to Jewish thought, one of the phenomena that would have marked the era of the messiah would have been precisely that of childbirth free from physical suffering. One of the most significant testimonies comes to us from the Apocalypse of Baruch, contemporary with the Johannine writings (end of the 1st century – beginning of the 2nd century). In it we read that when the Messiah has subjugated the whole world and reigns forever in peace, “women will no longer suffer during pregnancy and the anxiety will disappear when they have to give birth to the fruit of their womb” (73,1.7) .

Mary’s perennial virginity is symbolized by the triple star with which many Marian images are adorned, especially of the East.

4. Virginity after childbirth

Scripture is silent on this third aspect of Mary’s virginity: it neither affirms it nor denies it.

– In this regard, it cannot be denied that some texts seem to lead in another direction, such as that relating to the brothers of Jesus.

In the gospels and in the Acts, Jesus’ brothers or his sisters are mentioned several times in a generic form.

Two passages (Mk 6,3 and Mt 13,55) refer to the names of four brothers: James, Josès (Mk) or Joseph (Mt), Simon and Judas. Who are they?

The magisterium of the church sees them as relatives of Jesus in a broad sense (e.g. cousins).

The evidence supporting such an identification is as follows.

– If some NT authors speak of brothers and sisters of Jesus, they never present them as “children of Mary”. Of the Virgin it is only said that she is “mother of Jesus”.

– Furthermore, it is universally known that in Semitic or Semitic-influenced texts the meaning of the terms ‘brother’ or ‘sister’ is much broader than in our modern languages ​​because it also indicates more distant degrees of kinship.

– In particular, since Hebrew and Aramaic did not have a specific term to say “cousin, nephew, brother-in-law”, the word ‘brother’ was often used, or the use of long-winded and complicated circumlocutions was used, as “father’s brother’s son”.

– James and Joses (the first two “brothers of Jesus” named in Mk 6.3 and Mt 13.55) were children of a Mary, different from the mother of Jesus. Mark 15.40 attests it: “There were also some women who were watching from afar, among whom were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the Less and Joses, and Salome…”.

Later this Mary is called “Mary (mother) of James” (16,1). Mt 27,56 also remembers her as “mother of James and Joses”, and then as “the other Mary” (27,61; 28,1). Luke 24,10 mentions “Mary, that of James” (probably the same person).

– In John 19.25ff, the dying Jesus entrusts Mary to his favorite disciple, John. This was considered by the fathers as a sensitive observation of the fact that Mary did not have any other children, because in that case it would have been strange for her to have entrusted her to a stranger.

5. Then there is the passage in Mt 1,25 which literally sounds like this: “And he (Joseph) did not know her until she gave birth to a son“. It would be concluded that after the birth of Jesus Joseph consummated his marriage with Mary, who would therefore have had other offspring.

The Fathers of the Church already remembered that similar expressions are often used in the Bible, which cannot be interpreted literally.

For example in Gen 28,15 God says to Jacob: “I will not abandon you until I have done everything I told you.” It goes without saying that God will protect Jacob even after the promise is fulfilled.

Likewise in 2 Sam 6,23: “Mikal, daughter of Saul, had no children until she died”. It would be ridiculous to believe that Mikal had had children in her death.

Thus in Ps 110,1: “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool”.

But the king to whom this divine oracle is addressed will sit at the right hand of God even after victory over his enemies.

Also in Mt 28.20: “Behold, I am with you always, even to the end of the world”. But even after Christ he will be with his own; indeed, to a greater extent than before, since the kingdom will be realized in fullness.

Similarly, the ‘until’ of Mt 1,25 does not imply that Joseph had carnal relations with Mary after the birth of Jesus. The evangelist’s intent is to demonstrate that Jesus is the son of David (Mt 1,1), despite not having a human father (Mt 1,18-25). However, the question of Mary’s virginity after giving birth is out of his sight. Matthew offers no arguments for or against.

6. Finally there is the passage from Luke 2,7: “She gave birth to her firstborn son”. Some reason like this: if Jesus is Mary’s firstborn, it means that he was not her only one.

To be sure, we know from Jewish literature several examples in which a firstborn son is also an only-begotten son. See the parallelism of Zc 12,10: “They will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, they will mourn for him as one mourns for the firstborn“.

In the Biblical Antiquities of pseudo-Philo (1st century AD) Jephthah’s daughter is called both firstborn and only-begotten (39.11).

And a sepulchral epitaph, dated 28 January 5 BC. C., discovered in 1922 in the Jewish necropolis of Tell el Yehudieh, makes the deceased Arsinoe say: “But fate, in the pain of giving birth to my first-born son, led me to the end of my life.” Although this young mother died at her first birth, her son is still called the ‘firstborn’.

Furthermore, according to the Bible, the first son, even if only, is qualified as the firstborn because he is subject to the obligation of ransom (Ex 13,2.12; Nm 18,15-16). Therefore, Jesus, being his mother’s firstborn (Lk 2,7), will also be presented at the temple for this rite (Lk 2,22-24).

7. The tradition of the Church is also unanimous on this point

Ignatius of Antioch (d. c. 110) says that Jesus Christ was “truly born of a virgin.” “Our God Jesus Christ was carried in Mary’s womb according to the economy of God… And the virginity of Mary and her birth, as well as the death of the Lord, remained hidden from the prince of this century: three sensational mysteries, which were accomplished in the silence of God.”

Justin († c. 165), who defends the divinity of Christ before the Jews and the pagans, affirms the unique character of the conception of Jesus: “No one, other than our Christ, has ever been generated by a virgin”. For him Mary is the Virgin (Dialogue with Tryphon, 43.7).

Origen († 254) is in favor of the perpetual virginity of Mary, considering “well founded” the defense of “the dignity of Mary, which consists in having preserved herself in virginity until the end, so that that body destined to serve the word … would not know any sexual intercourse with a man, since the Holy Spirit had descended upon her” (In Mt comm. X, 17)

Epiphanius († 403) says that Mary’s perpetual virginity is a universal conviction of faith: “When ever and in what era did anyone dare to pronounce the name of Mary without immediately adding, if questioned, the Virgin?” (Adversus haereses, 1, 3).

He states that Mary’s birth occurred without pain and calls Mary “perpetual Virgin” 16 times.

Ambrose (†397) speaks of “uterus clausus, for which Mary is the good door that was closed and did not open. Christ passed through it, but did not open it” (De institutione virginis 8, 57).

Dear Alessandro, I think you will have enough to be convinced.

I thank you for your question, I remember you in prayer and I bless you.

Father Angelo

Questo articolo è disponibile anche in: