Ever a Virgin:
Church Teaching on the Perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary
By Rev. Fr. Benedict Hughes, CMRI
This article was originally published in The Reign of Mary, Issue No. 170, Fall 2018.
Faithful Catholics are fully aware of the Church teaching on the perpetual virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary. In fact, many Catholics are shocked to find out that Protestants generally deny this prerogative of our Blessed Lady. They believe that Mary bore other children after the birth of Jesus. Later in this article we will examine and refute the reasons for this assertion of theirs. Let us begin, however, with a review of what the Catholic Church teaches.
We can find the magisterial teaching on this topic especially in the liturgy. Take, for example, the Mass of the Common of the Blessed Virgin Mary. In the Collect we read: “…by the glorious intercession of blessed Mary, ever Virgin…” In the prayer known as the Secret we find: “…by the intercession of blessed Mary ever Virgin….” And finally, the Postcommunion has: “…[that] we may everywhere be protected by the patronage of blessed Mary ever Virgin…” The word ever is understood by all Catholics to indicate that Mary was a virgin before, during, and after the birth of Jesus Christ. Therefore, the Church frequently invokes and praises Mary in some such fashion as this: “Post partum, Virgo, inviolata permansisti (after childbearing, O Virgin, thou didst remain undefiled).”
The virginity of Mary before the birth of Jesus is understood by all Christians, who have heard the oft-quoted prophecy of Isaias: “The Lord Himself shall give you a sign. Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and His name shall be called Emmanuel” (7:14). St. Luke emphasizes Mary’s virginity at the time of the Annunciation: “The angel Gabriel was sent from God to a town of Galilee called Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man named Joseph, of the house of David, and the virgin’s name was Mary” (1:26-27). And when the angel foretold that Mary would bear a son, she asked, “How shall this happen, since I do not know man?” (We shall discuss later how these words of Our Lady indicate that she had made a vow of virginity.) The angel then answered her question by explaining that the Child would be conceived by the power of the Most High.
So the virginity of Mary before the birth of Jesus is unassailable. She was also a virgin during the birth of her divine Son. By that we mean that Jesus was born in a miraculous manner. Our Lady had no labor pains, for she was exempt from original sin, and painful childbearing is a punishment incurred by the disobedience of Eve. Our Blessed Mother, without any need of the assistance of a mid-wife, “brought forth her first-born son and wrapped him in swaddling clothes.” In every way the birth of Jesus was miraculous.
It is the virginity of Mary after the birth of Jesus, however, that is denied by the vast majority of Protestants. Not having the sense of veneration and love for the Blessed Virgin Mary that is a part of our heritage as Catholics, they consider that she was, more or less, just like other mothers. In fact, Protestants typically refer to Our Lady simply as the “highly-favored one,” rather than as a unique creature endowed with every grace and raised above — not only all the other saints — but even above all the angels in heaven.
Proofs of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary
For a faithful Catholic, there are several sources we can use to prove the various doctrines of the Faith: 1) Definitions of the Church; 2) Divine Tradition, which is found in the teachings of the Church Fathers; 3) and Sacred Scripture. In addition, we use reason, especially when comparing the various scriptural texts. We shall refer to each of these sources to prove the perpetual virginity of Mary. (I have purposely listed scriptural proofs last, so that we can spend more time on these, since Protestants would likely not be interested in Church magisterial teaching or in patristic teaching.)
To begin with Church teaching, we find that the title of “perpetual virgin” was applied to Mary by the Fifth General Council at Constantinople in 553 (D 214, 218, 227). This doctrine was expressly taught by Pope St. Leo I in an epistle which was cited by the Council of Chalcedon. It was also taught by the Lateran Synod in 649, which declared that Mary “conceived without seed, of the Holy Ghost, generated without injury (to her virginity), and her virginity continued unimpaired after the birth” (D 256). Throughout history, we find similar Church teachings. In our own times, we find Pope Pius XII referring to this doctrine in his encyclical Mystici Corporis, where he states: “It was she who gave miraculous birth to Christ our Lord.” In fact, so clear is this teaching in Church doctrinal definitions, that it is classified as De fide by theologians.
As far as the Church Fathers are concerned, we find among them a near unanimity. Origen, St. Ambrose, St. Jerome, St. Augustine, and St. Epiphanius all teach this doctrine. St. Jerome, in particular, wrote a lengthy defense of the perpetual virginity of Mary against the heretical and blasphemous teaching of one Helvidius. Finally, St. Basil sums up the patristic teaching by saying: “The friends of Christ do not tolerate hearing that the Mother of God ever ceased to be a virgin” (as quoted by Ludwig Ott in Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, p 207).
Let us now look at the various scriptural proofs for the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary. We have already quoted the response of Our Lady to the words of the angel at the Annunciation: “How shall this happen, since I do not know man?” (Luke 1:34). From this question, “it is inferred that she had taken the resolve of constant virginity on the ground of a special Divine enlightenment. In the light of this text St. Augustine and many Fathers and theologians believed that Mary made a formal vow of virginity” (Ott, p. 207). More on this below.
We also see in Sacred Scripture that every effort is made to make it clear that St. Joseph was not the true father of Jesus. When giving the genealogy of Our Lord, St. Matthew comes down to St. Joseph and, changing his terminology, says: “And Jacob begot Joseph, the husband of Mary, and of her was born Jesus who is called Christ” (1:16). Note that he does not use the term “begot” with Joseph. Likewise, St. Luke says that Jesus, “when he began his work, was about thirty years of age, being — as was supposed — the son of Joseph (3:23). Note the word “supposed.”
Another scriptural fact is that, from the cross, Jesus entrusted His mother to the care of the apostle St. John. If Our Blessed Mother had given birth to other children, there would have been no need of Jesus’ providing for her care after His death, as she would have been taken care of by these other children. Also, we find that there is no mention ever in Scripture of other progeny of Mary. Yes, as we shall see and explain below, there is mention of the “brethren” of Our Lord. But if this is refers to other children of Mary, why is she never mentioned as their mother?
Jesus Taught the Excellence of the State of Virginity
Let us also examine the doctrine of the excellence of virginity, as given in Holy Scripture. In the Old Testament there was not an understanding of this truth. But when Jesus Christ came into the world, He explained the excellence of the state of virginity, as well as the fact that it is not obligatory. On one such occasion, Jesus taught: “Not all can accept this teaching; but those to whom it has been given… Let him accept it who can” (Matthew, 19:11-12). St. Paul expounded this teaching in I Corinthians, chapter 7, where he explains that a married person is preoccupied with the care of a spouse and family, while an unmarried person is “concerned about the things of the Lord, how he may please God” (verse 32). In other words, a celibate person can devote more time and attention to the worship of God and the salvation of his soul.
This Gospel teaching was well understood and practiced by the early Christians. In fact, the number of virgins among these early Christians is too great to calculate. And there are many instances of virgins who sacrificed their lives rather than lose their vowed virginity. Two examples will suffice. Our first example is St. Cecilia, a popular saint who was martyred about the year 230.
According to the Acts of her martyrdom, Cecilia was forced by her parents to marry a pagan named Valerian, despite her vow of virginity. After the ceremony Cecilia warned Valerian not to touch her, for she was espoused to Christ and her purity was safeguarded by an angel. Valerian responded that he would believe in Christianity if he could see the angel. Cecilia replied that he must first become a Christian. So Valerian sought instruction and baptism from Pope Urban I, after which he was able to see the angel. Valerian, his brother Tiburtius, and a Roman soldier named Maximus were also martyred, along with St. Cecilia.
St. Cecilia was put to death by the sword in her own home in the Trastavere section of Rome. After being struck awkwardly on the neck three times by the inexperienced executioner, she remained alive for three more days. Later, a church was built on the site of her home, where her tomb was located. In 1599, Cardinal Sfondrati had the tomb excavated, and the remains were found in a perfect state of preservation, lying incorrupt in the same position as she was at the time of her death. Reverently, he had the tomb re-sealed, and so it has remained to this day.
Another well-known virgin-martyr is St. Agnes, who was martyred on January 21, 304, at the tender age of 13. One of the many suitors who sought the hand of this beautiful daughter of a wealthy family was the son of the governor. To his proposal of marriage she replied: “I am already promised to the Lord of the Universe. He is more splendid than the sun and stars, and He has said He will never leave me.” For refusing to marry, she was denounced as a Christian and put to death. Today, a church stands over the catacombs that contain her tomb.
Many other virgins can be cited — whether they were martyred or simply died a natural death after a life spent in the state of virginity — both in the early Church and throughout history since the time of Christ. All of them drew their inspiration to live a life of celibacy from the teaching and example of Our Lord. In fact, one of the primary reasons St. Jerome wrote his refutation of the errors of Helvidius (mentioned above), was to defend the preeminence of the state of virginity over marriage. This doctrine would later be defined by the Council of Trent, which anathematized those who would deny it.
Now all of this being the case, are we to suppose that the Blessed Virgin Mary, of all the saints, was unaware of the excellence of the state of virginity, or knowing it chose rather to renounce her virginity after the birth of Jesus and to become the mother of other children? Are we really to suppose that she, who was full of grace and blessed among all women, who was chosen by God Himself to be the mother of His divine Son, and who under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost would acknowledge: “My soul magnifies the Lord… for He that is mighty has done great things for me” — that she of all persons was unaware of the excellence of virginity? What a foolish thought!
None of us can choose his own mother; God Himself not only could, but in fact did so. Are we to suppose that He would not endow this woman whom He had chosen, with the greatest graces and make her the most blessed of creatures? Are we to suppose that He would wish to share her with another by allowing her to consummate marriage with a mere creature? (The most chaste St. Joseph was her guardian and only legally married to Our Blessed Mother.)
Protestant Objections to This Doctrine
It remains for us now to examine and refute the various arguments that are brought forth by non-Catholic writers, in opposition to this Church teaching. These may be summarized under the following topics: 1) the word “until” in Matthew 1:25; 2) scriptural references to Jesus as Mary’s “first-born son”; 3) and the frequent references to the “brethren” of Our Lord.
Oftentimes objections to Catholic teaching are due to a lack of understanding of Biblical terminology. For example, St. Matthew speaks of Joseph, telling us that after the angel had revealed to him in his sleep the source and reason for Mary’s pregnancy (“that which is begotten in her is of the Holy Spirit”), St. Joseph, “arising from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord had commanded him, and took unto him his wife. And he did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn son” (1:24-25). They are puzzled by the word “till” or, as other translations have it, “until.” But this should cause no confusion. In the Bible the word is often used to indicate a fact up to a certain point, without referring to anything after that point. In other words, the fact that St. Joseph did not consummate a marital union with the Blessed Virgin Mary “until” the birth of Jesus, does not imply that he did so afterwards.
To prove this, we can cite many other examples of Sacred Scripture where the same word is used, and in which the assumption that something was fulfilled afterwards is clearly absurd. Scripture says that “Samuel saw Saul no more till the day of his death” (I Kings 15:35). Likewise the Third Book of Kings speaks of Baasa, who “cut off the house of Jeroboam. He left not so much as one soul of his seed, till he had utterly destroyed him” (15:29). Again, St. Paul, standing before the council, states: “Brethren, I have conducted myself before God with a perfectly good conscience up to this day” (Acts 23:1). Are we to suppose that he no longer served God after that day? Or when Jesus told His apostles: “Behold, I am with you all days, even unto the consummation of the world”(Matthew 28:20), are we to suppose that He will no longer be with them after the consummation of the world? But perhaps the most clear refutation of the foolishness of this assumption can be seen in the Second Book of Kings, where we read that “Michol the daughter of Saul had no child until the day of her death” (6:23). Are we to suppose that she had children after the day of her death?
The second objection deals with the fact that Jesus is referred to as Mary’s “first-born” Son. Indeed, if a woman has only one son, he is her first-born son. But why is Jesus referred to in this manner? The reason is that, among the Hebrews, the first-born son had special privileges and duties. In paragraph 12 of his argument against Helvidius St. Jerome refutes the assumption that Jesus being the “first-born” implies that there were other children. He quotes at length from the Old Testament and concludes by saying: “Every only begotten son is a first-born son, but not every first-born is an only begotten.”
Finally, the third objection is the one that is most-often quoted by Protestants as implying (to their mind) that Mary bore other children. It is based on the frequent mention in the New Testament of the “brethren” of the Lord. For example, St. Paul says that when he went to Jerusalem to see St. Peter, he saw “none of the other apostles, except James, the brother of the Lord” (1:19). But the words “brother” or “brethren” are frequently used among the Jewish people to indicate an extended family, including cousins or other near relatives. Again, St. Jerome in his previously-mentioned refutation of Helvidius refutes this argument at great length, using many quotes from Scripture. For example, Abraham refers to his nephew Lot as his brother: “Abram therefore said to Lot: Let there be no quarrel, I beseech thee, between me and thee, and between my herdsmen and thy herdsmen: for we are brethren… And Lot chose to himself the country about the Jordan, and he departed from the east: and they were separated one brother from the other” (13: 8,11). Again, as mentioned above, the “brethren” of Jesus are never mentioned as being the children of Mary.
Conclusion
So we can see in the various objections against the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of the Blessed Virgin, based on scriptural passages, that the problem is one of not properly understanding the Scriptures, and in particular the style of writing and language used among the Hebrews. That is why we look to the Church founded by Christ for guidance and direction. Sadly, however, Protestants are denied the knowledge of our Blessed Mother that leads Catholics to render to her the love and honor so richly her due — something that must be most pleasing to her divine Son.
Some years ago a Catholic woman — a convert from the Baptist sect — mentioned this to me. She bitterly complained of this omission saying that for many years, “They kept the Blessed Mother back from me.” It was only when she began to truly know, love and reverence the Blessed Virgin Mary that her eyes were opened to the true Faith. Let us pray that more Protestants, who have been denied the truth of Mary’s place in God’s plan, will have their eyes opened, in order that Mary may lead them to a true knowledge and love of her Son Jesus. And may we Catholics never forget the holiness, the excellence of this woman who crushes the head of the Serpent.
Let us always preserve the love and veneration of Mary, ever a virgin, which has been practiced by true Christians down through the centuries. St. Augustine summarizes this faith of the Church in the Latin formula: Virgo concepit, virgo peperit, virgo permansit, which means “The virgin conceived, the virgin bore (Christ), and she always remained a virgin.”