David Valentine
My surprise, on studying this, was that perpetual virginity is a valid idea among the early Fathers - though only within a friendly debate, not dogmatic dispute. You can save all the NT data with this view; but I would say that it's eisegesis, trying to find grounds for an interpretation whose actual motivation is coming from outside Scripture. That's just dealing with the more reductive form 'no further children.'
Micah Joseph
has pointed to a sillier form from docetuc roots, which takes it further.
Jamie Brown
Perpetual virginity is completely unbiblical I sit. Care what the father’s say.
Konstantinos Theodore
Perpetual virginity is not completely unbiblical if the meaning is that st. Mary had not other children after she gave birth to the Lord. However is not something to make a dogma.
Micah Joseph
Keep in mind that the Roman view of "perpetual virginity" means not only that Mary never "knew" a man, but that her body and virginal tissues remained virginally intact even during and after giving birth to Jesus Christ.
Mark Sequeira
Why isn't this also a denial of the true humanity of Jesus?
Micah Joseph
It does strike me as very odd. I only learned of it in the last year.
Jesus would have still been fully human if he was born via caesarean section, of course, or somehow miraculously came out of the womb. But I the idea seems like a completely unnecessary miracle, originating in mythological Marian imaginations rather than any compelling Biblical or historical argument. Christ had the ability to pass through walls only after His resurrection, it would seem, and thus the birth of him doing something similar seems problematic or perhaps even Gnostic, as you perhaps implied.
Sharath Sasindran
Interestingly, a friend of mine audited an NT class at a Coptic Seminary /college and the lecturer essentially admitted the Protoevangelium of James played a large role in the development of the above view.
Konstantinos Theodore
That Mary's Virginal tissues remained intact after birth is indeed the case of the fake protoevangelium. If I remember correctly another women examines Mary and finds the case and declares the Miracle
Keith Mason
Luke Wilson
Jerome cites it in his defence Against Helvidius who doubted it. He certainly draws his account from the Protoevangelium of James (which was certainly not written in the period or century it depicts).
Michael Frost
See Steven Shoemaker's magisterial work, Ancient Traditions of the Virgin Mary's Dormition and Assumption (Oxford, 2004). As his research makes clear, "see the late fifth and sixth centuries" on this specific issue.
Different topic:
Seth Kasten
Ambrose argues for the Immaculate Purification, which is different though similar to Immaculate Conception. The difference is that Mary was purified of sin when the Holy Spirit came in and caused the Conception of Christ. Luther agreed with this idea, though believed it to be adiaphora.
Andre Barcelos
2) No comment on perpetual virginity. If Mary remained a virgin or not is a non issue. There would be no sin, nor shame, nor blemish to her honor in Mary consummating her marriage with Joseph.
Jonathan Ivanoff
The Orthodox take:
...
Perpetual Virginity: Yep, before, during, and after birth.
BTW: Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli all confessed the perpetual virginity of Mary.
Seth Kasten
Stoian Dan
Semper Virgo and Clauso Utero are in our confessions actually too. Though they are adiaphora and are mentioned in passing. Many confessional Lutherans still believe this and you'd be hard-pressed to find Lutheran theologian before Pietism creeped in that denied this doctrine.
Micah Joseph.
...
Jonathan Ivanoff
, do EO see Mary's perpetual virginity as Rome does - as remaining virginally intact in her bodily tissues? This is dogma for Rome, as I understand it.
Daniel Supek
Andrew Beardsley
Well it's biblical, and to deny it would make one a possible Nestorian, it connects with the hypostatic union. But like I said the other 3 are later inventions, would have to reject Holy Scripture as final authority to accept those doctrines of Mary.
