The large majority of discussions of the topic ignore a lot of the evidence against Mary's perpetual virginity. Hegesippus and Irenaeus, for example, probably rejected the concept that Mary was a perpetual virgin, yet few opponents of the doctrine cite those church fathers. Often, opponents of the doctrine don't cite any extrabiblical sources or only cite one or two. They need to get better at handling the issue.
For an overview of the evidence against the perpetual virginity of Mary in both Biblical and extrabiblical sources, see here (including the comments section) and here.
Even as late as the fourth century, a supporter of Mary's perpetual virginity, Basil of Caesarea, conceded some significant points on the subject. Philip Donnelly wrote:
"The answer came from a Catholic source, which we have strong grounds to believe was St. Basil, in the form of a discourse on the feast of the Theophany. In this sermon, after brief remarks on the eternal generation of the Word, the author takes up his main point, which is to comment on the account of the temporal birth of Christ given by St. Matthew. The author also focuses his attention on the possibility of conjugal relations between Mary and St. Joseph after the birth of Christ; he rejects this possibility, but not by appealing to dogmatic belief; he has no consciousness of any obligation from this angle, and even generously admits that there is no such obligation; faith, he candidly admits, demands only that we believe in the permanence of Mary's virginity up to (and including) the Incarnation; after the virginal conception there is no obligation imposed by faith. Despite this openly acknowledged freedom of opinion, the author goes on to stress that many excellent Christians — he calls them 'Philochristoi' — refuse to admit that Our Lady ever had conjugal relations with St. Joseph; he accepts and espouses their view, and adds as a reason the narrative of a certain Zachary who died in defense of Mary's honor. We may pass over this confirmatory reason, which is certainly ill-suited to prove Mary's virginity post partum, but we should not gloss over lightly the situation revealed by such a tale being used as a proof. For, it is evident from this discourse that in a region of the Greek world, apparently Asia Minor, an important Churchman, without any doubt the Archbishop of Caesarea, St. Basil, did not hold the perpetual virginity of Mary as a dogmatic truth, nor did his metropolitan Churches. Nevertheless, there was a strong movement toward advocating and accepting Mary's perpetual virginity — a movement gladly promoted by St. Basil himself, because of the 'Philochristoi' who espoused it….This discourse [of Basil] has been published by the Maurists under the title Homilia in sanctam Christi generationem; PG, 31, 1457-1476. The first editor, Dom Garnier, for reasons which seem quite trivial, relegated it to the opera spuria. The second editor, Dom Maran, on the other hand, was inclined to admit its authenticity; see PG, 29, 174. The majority of modern critics are still more favorable toward its authenticity; even if the author is not St. Basil, he certainly is one for whom the archenemy is Arianism, as the beginning of the discourse proves conclusively." (in Juniper Carol, ed., Mariology, Vol. 2 [Post Falls, Idaho: Mediatrix Press, 2018], approximate Kindle locations 6110, 15939)
Luigi Gambero wrote:
"As for the matter of Mary's perpetual virginity, Basil admits that, in theory, once the mystery of the Incarnation had taken place, Mary could have renounced virginity without compromising God's plan of salvation in any way. In practice, however, he defends the perpetual virginity of the Lord's Mother without hesitation, adducing as proof the religious sensibility and convictions of believers: [beginning of quotation of Basil] 'For 'he did not know her'—it says—'until she gave birth to a Son, her firstborn' (Mt 1:25). But this could make one suppose that Mary, after having offered in all purity her own service in giving birth to the Lord, by virtue of the intervention of the Holy Spirit, did not subsequently refrain from normal conjugal relations. That would not have affected the teaching of our religion at all, because Mary's virginity was necessary until the service of the Incarnation, and what happened afterward need not be investigated in order to affect the doctrine of the mystery. But since the lovers of Christ [that is, the faithful] do not allow themselves to hear that the Mother of God (Theotokos) ceased at a given moment to be a virgin, we consider their testimony to be sufficient.' [end of quotation of Basil] The bishop of Caesarea considers that the consensus of the faithful is a more than sufficient argument to establish that the perpetual virginity of the Mother of God is an indispensable requirement of ecclesial faith." (translated by Thomas Buffer, Mary And The Fathers Of The Church [San Francisco, California: Ignatius Press, 1999], approximate Kindle location 2148)
No comments:
Post a Comment