Virginitat perpètua de Maria

Per què els catòlics creuen que Maria va romandre verge?, quan la Bíblia diu que Jesús tenia germans i germanes?

I, per què és tan important la virginitat de Maria per als catòlics?

La resposta senzilla és: Els catòlics creuen que Maria va romandre verge durant tota la seva vida perquè és cert. És un ensenyament proclamat solemnement per l'Església de Crist, “pilar i fonament de la veritat” (veure el de Paul Primera carta a Timoteu 3:15); revelat a través de la Sagrada Tradició; i d'acord amb la Sagrada Escriptura (veure el de Paul Segona carta als Tessalonicencs 2:15).

Tan, Els catòlics creuen que el “germans i germanes del Senyor” esmentats a la Bíblia eren parents propers de Jesús, però no germans (com explicarem amb detall a continuació).

Finalment, i el més significatiu, La virginitat perpètua de Maria és essencial per al cristianisme pel que afirma sobre Jesús. En definitiva, aquesta creença apunta a la santedat de Crist i a la singularitat de l'Encarnació: l'acte de Déu fent-se home.

El profeta Ezequiel va declarar al príncep “sortirà, i després que hagi sortit, la porta es tancarà” (veure Ezequiel 46:12), i l'Església entén que això és una referència al naixement de Crist i a la virginitat de tota la vida de Maria (veure Sant Ambrosi, Consagració d'una Verge 8:52). Tan, era adequat que Maria mantingués la seva virginitat després del naixement de Jesús per qui Ell és: Déu en forma humana!

bíblicament, es podria reflexionar sobre la història de Moisès i la arbustiva ardent. Quan Moisès s'acostava al bosc, va dir el Senyor, “No us acosteu; traieu-vos les sabates dels peus, perquè el lloc on et trobes és terra santa” (Èxode 3:5).

Aquesta història ens ajuda a entendre la virginitat perpètua de Maria de dues maneres.

Primer, veiem que la terra estava santificada perquè la presència del Senyor hi havia baixat. No hem d'oblidar que aquest mateix Déu, que es va aparèixer a Moisès a la arbustiva ardent, va ser concebut en el ventre de Maria.

Tan, només seria oportú dir que ella, com aquella terra santa dins Èxode, calia santificar, especialment preparat, això és, rebre el Rei de reis i Senyor de senyors.

Segon, els Pares de l'Església van veure la mateixa imatge de la mata ardent–un arbust en flames, encara no consumida–com a metàfora del part de Maria sense perdre la seva virginitat. Per exemple, al segle IV, Va escriure Gregori de Nissa, “El que en aquell moment es prefigurava a la flama de la mata es manifestava obertament en el misteri de la Verge.. … Com a la muntanya la mata cremava però no es consumia, així la Mare de Déu va néixer la llum i no es va corrompre” (Sobre el naixement de Crist).

Essencialment, La virginitat perpètua de Maria proclama al món això perquè Crist era tan sant–Déu mateix–hauria estat inadequat que s'hagués format en el ventre d'una dona normal; i, igualment, perquè els pecadors hagin sortit d'aquell mateix ventre després d'ell–el ventre especialment preparat per portar el Messies. De nou, considera Ezequiel, “[El príncep] sortirà, i després que hagi sortit, la porta es tancarà.”

La virginitat de Maria en el moment del naixement del Senyor és indicada pel profeta Isaïes, qui afirma, “Heus aquí, una verge concebrà i donarà un fill, i li posarà el nom d'Emanuel” (7:14; veure Mateu 1:23 i Luke 1:27). Isaïes, després de tot, afirma la seva virginitat en concebre i en rodament. A més. resposta de la Maria, a l'anunci de l'Arcàngel concebiria i donaria a llum un Fill–“Com pot ser això ja que no conec home?” (Luke 1:34)–suggereix clarament que era verge. La seva reacció no té sentit d'una altra manera.

El seu estat perpètuament virginal està implicat en el Càntic de Salomó, que diu, “Un jardí tancat és la meva germana, la meva núvia, una font segellada” (4:12).

Com hem d'entendre això tenint en compte el fet que ella i Josep estaven promesos i posteriorment es van casar? Hi ha una antiga tradició que sosté que Maria va ser dedicada al Senyor com a verge consagrada des de la infància.; i que quan va arribar a la majoria d'edat va ser confiada a Josep, un vidu molt més gran que ella (cf. Protoevangeli de Jaume).

El concepte de castedat dins del matrimoni sota determinades condicions és, en efecte, un concepte bíblic. Per exemple, al Primer Llibre dels Reis 1:4, El rei David pren una donzella, Abishag, ser la seva dona per cuidar-lo en la seva vellesa, però s'absté de les relacions amb ella.

A més, en la seva primera carta als Corintis, Paul va recomanar un estat de celibat consagrat o de compromís perpetu a aquells que ho poden acceptar (veure 7:37-38).

Clarament, a la llum de la seva crida a donar a llum el Fill de Déu, El matrimoni de Maria amb Josep estava lluny de ser normal. Va ser ordenat per Déu per a la cura i protecció de la Verge i el seu Fill–per mantenir l'Encarnació amagada del món durant un temps. “La virginitat de Maria, el seu part, i també la mort del Senyor, estaven amagats del príncep d'aquest món,” va escriure Ignasi d'Antioquia, un deixeble de l'apòstol Joan, al voltant de l'any 107: “–tres misteris proclamats en veu alta, però treballat en el silenci de Déu” (Carta als Efesis 19:1).

En Mateu 1:19, La Sagrada Escriptura ens diu que Jospeh ho era “a just man.” Thus, having heard Mary had conceived a child by another, he resolved to put her away quietly to save her from probable execution under the Mosaic Law (as per Deuteronomi 22:23-24).

The Lord intervened, però, telling him through an angel in a dream, “Do not fear to take Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit; she will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins” (Mateu 1:20).

Joseph would not have taken these words to mean, però, that Mary was to be his wife in the ordinary sense of the word. As Saint Ambrose of Milan wrote,

“Neither does it make any difference that the Scripture says: ‘Joseph took his wife and went into Egypt’ (Matt. 1:24; 2:14); for any woman espoused to a man is given the name of wife. It is from the time that a marriage begins that the marital terminology is employed. It is not the deflowering of virginity that makes a marriage, but the marital contract. It is when the girl accepts the yoke that the marriage begins, not when she comes to know her husband physically” (The Consecration of a Virgin and the Perpetual Virginity of Mary 6:41).

That she bore the Son of God made her first the spouse of the Holy Spirit (per Luke 1:35); and Joseph was forbidden under the Law to have marital relations with the spouse of another.

What about the “germans i germanes del Senyor?”

Primer, it should be pointed out that there is a danger in quoting verses from Scripture out of the context of the whole of Scripture. The fact that Jesus entrusts Mary to the Apostle John, for example, is a strong indication He did not have actual siblings (veure Joan 19:27). For if Mary had other children, Jesus would not have had to ask someone outside of the family to care for her. (An argument against this gaining some traction in Evangelical circles is the notion that Jesus entrusted Mary to John because James and the Lord’s other “brethren” were not yet Christians. But this argument is tenuous. If this were the case, one would expect the Gospels to give some explanation to this effect. The fact that Jesus gives Mary to John without explanation indicates Mary had no other children.)

How, aleshores, are we to interpret verses such as Mateu 13:55, in which people in the crowd remark, “Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t Mary known to be his mother and James, Josep, Simon and Judas his brothers? Aren’t his sisters our neighbors?”

The Catholic position that these “germans” i “sisters” were close relatives, such as cousins, però no germans, agrees with the ancient Jewish custom of calling one’s kinsman “brother” (per Gènesi 13:8; 14:14; 29:15, et al.). As Pope John Paul the Great wrote, “It should be recalled that no specific term exists in Hebrew and Aramaic to express the word ‘cousin’, and that the term ‘brother’ and ‘sister’ therefore included several degrees of relationship.”¹

A més, it is elsewhere revealed in Mateu això “James and Joseph” were actually sons of a different Mary, who stood with the rest of the women at the foot of the Cross and accompanied Mary Magdalene to the tomb on Easter morning (27:55-56; 28:1).

This other Mary is commonly believed to be the wife of Clopas, who may have been an uncle of Jesus (veure Joan 19:25; see also Eusebius, History of the Church 3:11).² It is telling, a més, that the Lord’s “brethren” are nowhere in Scripture referred to as sons of Mary, as Jesus often is called (veure Mateu 13:55; senyal 6:3, et al.).

There are two other Gospel verses that opponents of Mary’s Perpetual Virginity often cite: Mateu 1:25 i Luke 2:7.

Mateu 1:25 says that Joseph “had no relations with her at any time before she bore a son.” As Ludwig Ott explained in Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, però, this verse “assert(s) that up to a definite point in time the marriage was not consummated, but not by any means that it was consummated after this” (Tan Books, 1960, p. 207). The goal of Mateu 1:25 was to affirm that Jesus had no earthly father, and was truly the Son of God. It was not meant to suggest anything about Joseph and Mary’s relationship after Jesus’ birth. Consider the Second Book of Samuel 6:23, which says that Mary “had no child to the day of her death.” Obviously, this does not mean she had a child after her death. En Mateu 28:20, Jesus promises to be with His followers “to the close of the age.” De nou, this does not mean He will cease to be with them beyond that point.

En Luke 2:7, Jesus is called Mary’s “first-born.” However, as Pope John Paul explained:

“The word ‘firstborn,’ literally means ‘a child not preceded by another’ i, in itself, makes no reference to the existence of other children. A més, the Evangelist stresses this characteristic of the Child, since certain obligations proper to Jewish law were linked to the birth of the firstborn son, independently of whether the mother might have given birth to other children. Thus every only son was subject to these prescriptions because he was ‘begotten first’ (cf. Luke 2:23)” (“The Church Presents Mary as ‘Ever Virgin’”)

Michael O’Carroll, a més, reported, “The Jewish burial inscription in Egypt, dating from the first century, … helps answer the objection against Mary’s perpetual virginity based on St. Luke’s use of the word ‘first-born’ (prototokos) (2:7). That the word did not imply other children is shown by its use in this case to describe a woman who died after the birth of her first child, who could not obviously have had others” (Theotokos: A Theological Encyclopedia of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Michael Glazier, 1982, p. 49).

What Did the Church Fathers Say?

Since both sides in the dispute over Mary’s Perpetual Virginity, pro and con, make scriptural arguments to support their position, how are we to determine who is right? Who is interpreting Scripture correctly, in the authentically apostolic way?

One way to provide support is to consult Christianity’s ancient historical writings, commonly known as the writings of the Early Church Fathers.

Clement of Alexandria, for instance, at the start of the third century wrote, “This Mother alone was without milk, because she alone did not become a wife. She is at once both Virgin and Mother” (The Instructor of the Children 1:6:42:1).

Clement’s pupil, Origen, in the first decades of that century, confirmed that Mary “had no other son but Jesus” (Commentaries on John 1:6). Elsewhere, he wrote, “And I think it in harmony with reason that Jesus was the first-fruit among men of the purity which consists in chastity, and Mary was among women; for it were not pious to ascribe to any other than her the first-fruit of virginity” (Commentaries on Matthew 2:17).

Along with his extravagant praise for her, Athanasius (d. 373) described Mary as “Ever-Virgin” (Discourses Against the Arians 2:70).

In about 375, Epiphanius argued, “Was there ever anyone of any breeding who dared to speak to the name of Holy Mary, and being questioned, did not immediately add, ‘the Virgin?’” (Panarion 78:6).

“Segurament,” wrote Pope Siricius in 392, “we cannot deny that Your Reverence was perfectly justified in rebuking him on the score of Mary’s children, and that you had good reason to be horrified at the thought that another birth might issue from the same virginal womb from which Christ was born according to the flesh” (Letter to Anysius, Bishop of Thessalonica).

Ambrose commented in 396, “Imitate her, holy mothers, who in her only dearly beloved Son set forth so great an example of material virtue; for neither have you sweeter children, nor did the Virgin seek the consolation of being able to bear another son” (Letters 63:111).

Augustine of Hippo (d. 430) remarked, “A Virgin conceiving, a Virgin bearing, a Virgin pregnant, a Virgin bringing forth, a Virgin perpetual. Why do you wonder at this, O man? It was fitting for God to be born thus, when He deigned to become a man” (Sermons 186:1).

Pope Leo the Great declared in 449, “He was conceived of the Holy Spirit within the womb of His Virgin Mother. She brought Him forth without the loss of virginity, even as she conceived Him without its loss” (Tome 28). Elsewhere the Pontiff wrote, “For a Virgin conceived, a Virgin bore, and a Virgin she remained” (Sermon on the Feast of the Nativity 22:2).

Thus, do we find an historical continuity of this teaching from the early years of the faith down to today.

---