മേരിയുടെ ശാശ്വത കന്യകാത്വം

Why do Catholics believe Mary remained a virgin, when the Bible says Jesus had brothers and sisters?

ഒപ്പം, why is Mary’s virginity so important to Catholics?

The simple answer is: Catholics believe Mary remained a virgin throughout her lifetime because it is true. It is a teaching solemnly proclaimed by Christ’s Church, “the pillar and foundation of truth” (പോളിന്റെ കാണുക തിമോത്തിക്കുള്ള ആദ്യ കത്ത് 3:15); revealed through Sacred Tradition; and in agreeance with Sacred Scripture (പോളിന്റെ കാണുക തെസ്സലോനിക്യർക്കുള്ള രണ്ടാമത്തെ കത്ത് 2:15).

അങ്ങനെ, Catholics believe that thebrothers and sisters of the Lordmentioned in the Bible were near-relations of Jesus, but not siblings (as we’ll explain in detail below).

അവസാനമായി, and most significantly, Mary’s Perpetual Virginity is essential to Christianity because of what it affirms about Jesus. ആത്യന്തികമായി, this belief points to the holiness of Christ and to the uniqueness of the Incarnation: the act of God becoming man.

The prophet Ezekiel declared the princeshall go out, and after he has gone out the gate shall be shut” (കാണുക എസെക്കിയേൽ 46:12), and the Church understands this to be a reference to Christ’s birth and Mary’s lifelong virginity (see Saint Ambrose, Consecration of a Virgin 8:52). അങ്ങനെ, it was fitting that Mary would retain her virginity after the birth of Jesus because of who He is: God in human form!

Scripturally, one might reflect upon the story of Moses and the burning bush. As Moses approached the bush, the Lord said, “Do not come near; put off your shoes from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground” (പുറപ്പാട് 3:5).

This story helps us to understand Mary’s Perpetual Virginity in two ways.

ആദ്യം, we see that the ground was sanctified because the presence of the Lord had descended there. We should not forget that this same God, who appeared to Moses in the burning bush, was conceived in the womb of Mary.

അങ്ങനെ, it would only be fitting to say that she, like that holy ground in പുറപ്പാട്, needed to be sanctified, specially prepared, അതാണ്, to receive the King of kings and Lord of lords.

രണ്ടാമത്, the Church Fathers saw the image of the burning bush itselfa bush aflame, yet not consumedas a metaphor of Mary’s giving birth without forfeiting her virginity. ഉദാഹരണത്തിന്, in the fourth century, Gregory of Nyssa wrote, “What was prefigured at that time in the flame of the bush was openly manifested in the mystery of the Virgin. … As on the mountain the bush burned but was not consumed, so the Virgin gave birth to the light and was not corrupted” (On the Birth of Christ).

Essentially, Mary’s Perpetual Virginity proclaims to the world that because Christ was so holyGod Himselfit would have been inappropriate for Him to have been formed in the womb of an ordinary woman; ഒപ്പം, അതുപോലെ, for sinners to have come from that same womb after Himthe womb specially prepared to bear the Messiah. വീണ്ടും, consider Ezekiel, “[The prince] shall go out, and after he has gone out the gate shall be shut.

Mary’s virginity at the time of the Lord’s birth is indicated by the prophet Isaiah, who states, “ഇതാ, ഒരു കന്യക ഗർഭം ധരിച്ച് ഒരു മകനെ പ്രസവിക്കും, and shall call his name Immanuel” (7:14; കാണുക മത്തായി 1:23 ഒപ്പം ലൂക്കോസ് 1:27). യെശയ്യാവ്, എല്ലാത്തിനുമുപരി, affirms her virginity in conceiving ഒപ്പം in bearing. മാത്രമല്ല. Mary’s response, to the Archangel’s announcement she would conceive and bear a Son–“How can this be since I do not know man?” (ലൂക്കോസ് 1:34)–clearly suggests that she was a virgin. Her reaction hardly makes sense otherwise.

Her perpetually virginal state is implied in the സോളമന്റെ ഗാനം, which says, “A garden locked is my sister, my bride, a fountain sealed” (4:12).

How are we to understand this given the fact that she and Joseph were betrothed and subsequently married? There is an ancient tradition which holds that Mary was dedicated to the Lord as a consecrated virgin from infancy; and that when she came of age was entrusted to Joseph, a widower much older than she (cf. Protoevangelium of James).

The concept of chastity within marriage under certain conditions is, തീർച്ചയായും, a biblical concept. ഉദാഹരണത്തിന്, in the First Book of Kings 1:4, King David takes a maiden, Abishag, to be his wife to care for him in his old age, but abstains from relations with her.

മാത്രമല്ല, in his First Letter to the Corinthians, Paul recommended a state of consecrated celibacy or perpetual betrothal to those who can accept it (കാണുക 7:37-38).

വ്യക്തമായി, in light of her call to bear the Son of God, Mary’s marriage to Joseph was far from ordinary. It was ordained by God for the care and protection of the Virgin and Her Sonto keep the Incarnation hidden from the world for a time. “The virginity of Mary, her giving birth, and also the death of the Lord, were hidden from the prince of this world,” wrote Ignatius of Antioch, a disciple of the Apostle John, in about the year 107: “–three mysteries loudly proclaimed, but wrought in the silence of God” (എഫെസ്യർക്കുള്ള കത്ത് 19:1).

ഇൻ മത്തായി 1:19, Sacred Scripture tells us Jospeh wasa just man.” അങ്ങനെ, 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 നിയമാവർത്തനം 22:23-24).

The Lord intervened, എങ്കിലും, 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” (മത്തായി 1:20).

Joseph would not have taken these words to mean, എങ്കിലും, 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’ (മാറ്റ്. 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 ലൂക്കോസ് 1:35); and Joseph was forbidden under the Law to have marital relations with the spouse of another.

What about thebrothers and sisters of the Lord?”

ആദ്യം, 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, ഉദാഹരണത്തിന്, is a strong indication He did not have actual siblings (കാണുക ജോൺ 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 otherbrethrenwere 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, പിന്നെ, are we to interpret verses such as മത്തായി 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, ജോസഫ്, Simon and Judas his brothers? Aren’t his sisters our neighbors?”

The Catholic position that these “സഹോദരങ്ങൾ” ഒപ്പം “sisterswere close relatives, such as cousins, but not siblings, agrees with the ancient Jewish custom of calling one’s kinsman “സഹോദരൻ” (per ഉല്പത്തി 13:8; 14:14; 29:15, തുടങ്ങിയവർ.). 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 ‘brotherand ‘sistertherefore included several degrees of relationship.1

മാത്രമല്ല, it is elsewhere revealed in മത്തായി എന്ന് “James and Josephwere 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 (കാണുക ജോൺ 19:25; see also Eusebius, സഭയുടെ ചരിത്രം 3:11).2 It is telling, കൂടാതെ, that the Lord’sbrethrenare nowhere in Scripture referred to as sons of Mary, as Jesus often is called (കാണുക മത്തായി 13:55; അടയാളപ്പെടുത്തുക 6:3, തുടങ്ങിയവർ.).

There are two other Gospel verses that opponents of Mary’s Perpetual Virginity often cite: മത്തായി 1:25 ഒപ്പം ലൂക്കോസ് 2:7.

മത്തായി 1:25 says that Josephhad no relations with her at any time before she bore a son.As Ludwig Ott explained in Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, എങ്കിലും, this verseassert(എസ്) 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, പി. 207). The goal of മത്തായി 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 Jesusbirth. Consider the Second Book of Samuel 6:23, which says that Maryhad no child to the day of her death.” സ്പഷ്ടമായി, this does not mean she had a child after her death. ഇൻ മത്തായി 28:20, Jesus promises to be with His followersto the close of the age.” വീണ്ടും, this does not mean He will cease to be with them beyond that point.

ഇൻ ലൂക്കോസ് 2:7, Jesus is called Mary’sfirst-born.” എന്നിരുന്നാലും, as Pope John Paul explained:

The word ‘firstborn,’ literally means ‘a child not preceded by another’ ഒപ്പം, in itself, makes no reference to the existence of other children. മാത്രമല്ല, 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. ലൂക്കോസ് 2:23)” (“The Church Presents Mary as ‘Ever Virgin’”)

Michael O’Carroll, കൂടാതെ, 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” (തിയോടോക്കോസ്: A Theological Encyclopedia of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Michael Glazier, 1982, പി. 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 Maryhad no other son but Jesus” (Commentaries on John 1:6). Elsewhere, അവന് എഴുതി, “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 (ഡി. 373) described Mary asEver-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).

“തീർച്ചയായും,” 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 (ഡി. 430) remarked, “A Virgin conceiving, a Virgin bearing, a Virgin pregnant, a Virgin bringing forth, a Virgin perpetual. Why do you wonder at this, മനുഷ്യാ? 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).

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


  1. കാണുക “The Church Presents Mary as ‘Ever Virgin;’” L’Osservatore Romano, Weekly Edition in English, സെപ്റ്റംബർ 4, 1996.
  2. An argument against this, എങ്കിലും,” observed Karl Keating, “is that James is elsewhere (Mt 10:3) described as the son of Alphaeus, which would mean that Mary, whoever she was, was the wife of both Cleophas and Alphaeus. One solution is that she was widowed once, then remarried. More probably Alphaeus and Cleophas (Clopas in Greek) are the same person, since the Aramaic name for Alphaeus could be rendered in Greek in different ways, either as Alphaeus or Clopas. Another possibility is that Alphaeus took a Greek name similar to his Jewish name, the way that Saul took the name Paul” (കത്തോലിക്കാ മതവും മൗലികവാദവും, ഇഗ്നേഷ്യസ് പ്രസ്സ്, 1988, പി. 288).

പകർപ്പവകാശം 2010 – 2023 2ഫിഷ്.കോ