Bede On Opponents Of Mary's Perpetual Virginity

I've written before about how opposition to the perpetual virginity of Mary persisted beyond the earliest centuries, into the late patristic and early medieval eras. Bede, writing in the eighth century, uses the present tense to refer to opponents of the perpetual virginity of Mary:

"That Mary is described as having given birth to her firstborn son [Luke 2:7] is not to be taken to mean that she also brought forth other sons, as the Helvidian heretics claim, as if Christ could not be called 'firstborn' unless he had brothers, in the same way that one is not customarily called 'only-begotten', unless he lacks brothers....And so, the phrase 'every male opening the womb' [Luke 2:23] refers to the practice of ordinary birth. Not that our Lord should be believed on his exit to have deprived the lodging of the sacred womb of its virginity which he had sanctified on his entrance, in accordance with the heretics who say that the blessed Virgin Mary was a virgin up the time of giving birth, but not a virgin afterwards. Rather, in accordance with the orthodox faith he should be believed to have come forth from the closed womb of the Virgin, like a bridegroom from his marriage bed." (Calvin Kendall and Faith Wallis, translators and editors, Bede: Commentary On The Gospel Of Luke [Liverpool, England: Liverpool University Press, 2023], 153-54, 172-73)

People sometimes speak of individuals or groups of the past, who aren't currently alive, with the present tense. So, Bede may not have been responding to any recent or current individuals or groups. It's plausible that he was interacting with one or more recent or current sources, though. And even if he wasn't, his comments at least illustrate that he was aware of the issues involved and considered them worth addressing.

Notice his use of the plural "heretics". He doesn't think Helvidius took his position in isolation from everybody else.

His reference to Mary's in partu virginity as part of the "orthodox faith" contradicts the rejection of her in partu virginity by earlier sources, including some church fathers. It's also inconsistent with the more ecumenical approach taken by some earlier sources who held to Mary's perpetual virginity, as I've discussed elsewhere (e.g., here and here). It's not just that the perpetual virginity of Mary was a later development. The significance assigned to it also developed over time.