Virgin Mary

.

The Perpetual virginity of Mary

Pope Paul IV, in his Constitution, Cum Quorumdam Hominum, of 1555, expressed the constant teaching of the Catholic Church concerning both the virgin birth of Jesus Christ and the perpetual virginity of Mary:

We question and admonish all those who . . . have asserted, taught, and believed . . . that our Lord . . . was not conceived from the Holy Spirit according to the flesh in the womb of the Blessed Mary ever Virgin, but, as other men, from the see of Joseph . . . or that the same Blessed Virgin Mary is not truly the mother of God and did not retrain her virginity intact before the birth, in the birth, and perpetually after the birth. (In Neuner and Dupuis, The Christian Faith, 217. See CCC, pars 484-486, 496-498, 502-506, 510, 723 (for the virgin birth); pars 499-501, 507, 510, 721 (for the perpetual virginity of Mary))

Answer from A Biblical Defense of Catholicism, by Dave Armstrong, Sophia Institute Press, © 2003

1) Mary the "Mother of God" (Theotokos) The official, dogmatic proclamation of this dogma was made at the Ecumenical Council of Ephesus in 431, in response to the heresy of Nestorianism.

Scripture implicitly affirms Mary's Divine motherhood by attesting, on the one hand, the true Divinity of Christ, and on the other hand, Mary's true motherhood. Thus Mary is called: "Mother of Jesus" (John 2:1) ... "Mother of the Lord" (Luke 1:43). Mary's true motherhood is clearly foretold by the Prophet Isaiah: "Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel" (Isaiah 7:14) . . . . the woman who bore the Son of God is Progenitress of God, or the Mother of God [ see also Matt. 1:18, 12:46, 13:55; Luke 1:31, 35; Gal 4:4]. (Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, 196-197)

The doctrine of Mary as Theotokos flows consistently and straightforwardly from the doctrine of the Holy Trinity and the Incarnation of the Second Person of the Trinity, the Son, Jesus. Cardinal Gibbons explains:

We affirm that the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, the Word of God, who in His divine nature is from all eternity begotten of the Father, consubstantial with Him, was in the fullness of time, begotten, by being born of the Virgin, thus taking to Himself, from her maternal womb, a human nature of the same substance with hers.

But it may be said the Blessed Virgin is not the Mother of the Divinity. She had not, and she could no have, any part in the generation of the Word of God, for that generation is eternal; her maternity is temporal. He is her Creator; she is His creature. Style her, if you will, the Mother of the man Jesus or even of the human nature of the Son of God but not the Mother of God.

I shall answer this objection by putting a question. Did the mother who bore us have any part in the production of our soul? Was not this nobler part of our being the work of God alone? And yet who would for a moment dream of saying "the mother of my body," and not "my mother"? . . . (Gibbons, The Faith of Our Fathers, 137-138)

In like manner . . . the Blessed virgin, under the overshadowing of the Holy Ghost, by communicating to the Second Person of the Adorable Trinity, as mothers do, a true human nature of the same substance with her own, is there really and truly His Mother.

2) The Immaculate Conception of Mary Pope Pius IX (in the papal bull Ineffabilis Deus) infallibly defined this doctrine as binding upon all Catholics on December 8, 1854.

Genesis 3:15 (known as the "Protoevangelion"): "I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel." Ludwig Ott expounds this verse:

The literal sense of the passage is possibly the following: Between Satan and his followers on the one hand, and Eve and her posterity on the other hand, there is to be constant moral warfare. The posterity of Eve will achieve a complete and final victory over Satan and his followers, even if it is wounded in the struggle. The posterity of Eve includes the Messiah, in whose power humanity will win a victory over Satan. Thus the passage is indirectly messianic.

The seed of the woman was understood as referring to the Redeemer, and thus the Mother of the Redeemer came to be seen in the woman. Since the second century, this direct messianic-Marian interpretation has been expounded by individual Fathers, for example, St. Irenaeus, St. Epiphanius .... St. Cyprian ... St. Leo the Great. However, it is not found in the writings of the majority of the Fathers . . . According to this interpretation, Mary stands with Christ in a perfect and victorious enmity toward Satan and his following. Many of the later scholastics and a great many modern theologians argue, in the light of this interpretation . . that Mary's victory over Satan would not have been perfect, is she had ever been under his dominion. Consequently she must have entered the world without the stain of Original Sin. (Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, 200)

Most Protestant Bible translations follow the King James, or Authorized, Version's lead in rendering kecharitomene, the Greek word, as "favored," as indeed also some recent Catholic versions. The favored (no pun intended!) Traditional Catholic rendering (actually the more literal rendering) is "Hail, full of grace" (for example, Douay, Confraternity, Knox). The word Mary (after hail) is not in the text, but strongly implied, as the angel is addressing her by title; thus we arrive at the phrase "Hail, Mary, full of grace,"

The Bible speaks only implicitly of many things that Protestants strongly believe, such as the proper mode of Baptism (immersion, sprinkling, or pouring?). The Immaculate Conception is entirely possible within scriptural presuppositions.

Luke 1:35 (The Annunciation; Mary as a type of the ark of the covenant): "And the angel said to her, 'The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the pow3er of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God.

Overshadow is derived from the Greek, episkiasei, which denotes a bright cloud or cloud of glory. It is used in reference to the cloud at the transfiguration of Jesus (Matt. 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:34) and hearkens back to instances of the Shekinah glory of the God in the Old Testament (Exod. 24:15-16, 40:34-38; 1 Kings 8:10).

The Septuagint uses episkiasei in Exodus 40:34-35. Mary, as Theotokos, becomes, in effect, the new temple and holy of holies, where God dwelt in a special, spatially located fashion. In particular Scripture seems to be making a direct symbolic parallelism between Mary and the ark of the covenant. She is the bearer and ark of the New Covenant, which Jesus brings about (Heb. 8:6-13; 12:24).

3) The Assumption of Mary

Pope Pius XII, in his Apostolic Constitution, Munificentissimus Deus, of November 1, 1950, proclaimed this dogma in the following carefully selected words:

By the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own authority, we proclaim, declare, and define as a dogma revealed by God: the Immaculate Mother of God, Mary ever Virgin, when the course of her earthly life was finished, was taken up body and soul into the glory of Heaven. (CCC, pars. 996, 974; Hardon, CC 154-155, 160-163; Hardon, PCD, 32)

Ludwig Ott presents some of the biblical indications of the Assumption:

Direct and express scriptural proofs are not to be had. The possibility of the bodily assumption before the second coming of Christ is not excluded by 1 Corinthians, 15:23, as the objective Redemption was completed with the sacrificial death of Christ, and the beginning of the final era foretold by the prophets commenced. Its probability is suggested by Matthew 27:52-53: "And the graves were opened: and many bodies of the saints that had slept arose, and coming out of the tombs after His Resurrection came into the holy city and appeared to many." According to the more probable explanation, which was already expounded by the Fathers, the awakening of the "saints" was a final resurrection and transfiguration. If, however, the justified of the Old Covenant were called to the perfection of salvation immediately after the conclusion of the redemptive work of Christ, then it is possible and probable that the Mother of the Lord was called to it also.

From her fullness of grace spoken of in Luke 1:28, Scholastic theology derives the doctrine of the bodily assumption and glorification of Mary. Since she was full of grace, she remained preserved from the three-fold curse of sin (Gen. 3:16-19), as well as from her return to dust . . .

Modern theology usually cites Genesis 3:15 in support of the doctrine. Since by "the seed of the woman" it understands Christ, and by "the woman", Mary, it is argued that as Mary had an intimate share in Christ's battle against Satan and in His victory over Satan and sin, she must also have participated intimately in His victory over death. It is true that the literal reference of the text is to Eve and not Mary, but already since the end of the second century (St. Justin), Tradition has seen in Mary the new Eve. (Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, 208-209. For the "New Eve" typology, see Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 411, 494, 511, 726, 975.)

Lest one think that a bodily ascent into Heaven (of a creature, as opposed to Jesus) is impossible and "biblically unthinkable," Holy Scripture contains the examples of Enoch (Heb. 11:5; cf. Gen 5:24), Elijah (2 Kings 2:1, 11), St. Paul's being caught up to the third heaven (2 Cor. 12:2-4), possibly bodily, and events during the Second Coming (1 Thess. 4:15-17), believed by many Evangelicals to constitute the "Rapture," an additional return of Christ for believers only. All of these occur by virtue of the power of God, not the intrinsic ability of the persons.

The Assumption of the Blessed virgin flows of necessity from the Immaculate Conception and Mary's actual sinlessness....

4) The Perpetual virginity of Mary

Pope Paul IV, in his Constitution, Cum Quorumdam Hominum, of 1555, expressed the constant teaching of the Catholic Church concerning both the virgin birth of Jesus Christ and the perpetual virginity of Mary:

We question and admonish all those who . . . have asserted, taught, and believed . . . that our Lord . . . was not conceived from the Holy Spirit according to the flesh in the womb of the Blessed Mary ever Virgin, but, as other men, from the see of Joseph . . . or that the same Blessed Virgin Mary is not truly the mother of God and did not retrain her virginity intact before the birth, in the birth, and perpetually after the birth. (In Neuner and Dupuis, The Christian Faith, 217. See CCC, pars 484-486, 496-498, 502-506, 510, 723 (for the virgin birth); pars 499-501, 507, 510, 721 (for the perpetual virginity of Mary))

The Greek word for brother in the New Testament is adelphos. The well-known Protestant linguistic reference An Expository Dictionary of the New Testament Words defines it as follows:

1. Male children of the same parents . . .

2. Male descendants of the same parents, Acts 7:23, 26; Hebrews 7:5 . . .

4. People of the same nationality, Acts 3:17, 22; Romans 9:3 . . .

5. Any man, a neighbor, Luke 10:29; Matthew 5:22, 7:3;

6. Persons united by a common interest, Matthew 5:47;

7. Persons united by a common calling, Revelation 22:9;

8. Mankind, Matthew 25:40; Hebrews 2:17;

9. The disciples, and so, by implication, all believers, Matthew 28:10; John 20:17;

10. Believers, apart from sex, Matthew 23:8; Acts 1:15; Romans 1:13; 1 Thessalonians 1:4; Revelation 19:10 (the word sisters is used of believers, only in 1 Timothy 5:2) . . . . (Vine, An Expository Dictionary of New testament Words, Vol. 1, 154-155.)

It Is evident, therefore, from the range of possible definitions of adelphos, that Jesus' "brothers" need not necessarily be siblings of Jesus on linguistic grounds, as many commentators, learned and unlearned, seem to assume uncritically. Be examining the use of adelphos and related words in Hebrew, and by comparing Scripture with Scripture ("exegesis"), one can determine that most sensible explanation of all the biblical date taken collectively. Many examples prove that adelphos has a very wide variety of meanings:

In the King James Version, Jacob is called the "brother" of his Uncle Laban (Gen. 29:15; 29:10). The same thing occurs with regard to Lot and Abraham (Gen. 14:14; 11:26-27). The Revised Standard Version uses "kinsman" at 29:15 and 14:14.

Use of brother or brethren for mere kinsmen: Deuteronomy 23:7; 2 Samuel 1:26; 1 Kings 9:14, 20:32; 2 Kings 10:13-14; Jeremiah 24:9; Amos 1:9).

In Luke 2:41-51, ... it is fairly obvious that Jesus is the only child....

Jesus himself uses brethren in the larger sense: Matthew 23:8, 23:1; 12:49-50.

The term Firstborn means pre-eminent and nowhere assumes later siblings, etc.

The Assumption of the Blessed Mary was defined by Pope Pius XII in 1950, in Munificentissimus Deus : "By the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own authority, we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory."

For Catholics, this is proof of the Assumption of Mary, as long as Pope Pius defined it infallibly, as is almost universally assumed by Catholics. However, Bishop Geoffrey Robinson (Confronting Power and Sex in the Catholic Church) believes that the pope's teaching on this subject was not infallible because a clause in Pastor Aeternalis, which defined papal infallibility in 1870, means that the pope can not infallibly define a new doctrine (chapter 4):

"6. For the Holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles."

As Pope Pius himself stated, he was pronouncing a new doctrine from divine revelation, not expounding a matter transmitted by the apostles. Bishop Robinson does not say the Assumption of Mary is necessarily untrue, merely that Pope Pius XII did not infallibly define it. There is no other proof that Mary was assumed bodily into heaven.

Catholic Answer:

Pope Pius XII made no allusions to the Assumption being a new revelation but rather a belief passed down from the apostles through Sacred Tradition from the earliest days of the Church. Pope Pius simply made official that which had been believed from the beginning of the Church. To read the entire text of MUNIFICENTISSIMUS DEUS see the link below to the Vatican website.