Calvin And The Perpetual Virginity Of Mary ...

amishrockstar · #1 (**permalink**) 02-01-2008, 01:42 PM

I've recently come across assertions that Calvin believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary (as well as Luther and Zwingli), but every time a reference is given to substantiate their claims their passages are either out of context or they're where Calvin simply says that it's hard to say that she was or she wasn't an 'ever-virgin.'
Any thoughts on this? Does anyone know of a place where he clearly gave a 'positive' statement, something like "Mary continued to be a virgin after the birth of Christ?"
THANKS

bookslover · #2 (**permalink**) 02-03-2008, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by amishrockstar

Any thoughts on this? Does anyone know of a place where he clearly gave a 'positive' statement, something like "Mary continued to be a virgin after the birth of Christ?"
THANKS

If he did say that, he's wrong. Mary remained a virgin only until she gave birth to Jesus. She then, according to the New Testament, had at least 3 other sons and 2 daughters. We are even given the boys' names.

I'm amazed that this is even controversial. But, thanks to the RCC...

SRoper · #3 (**permalink**) 02-03-2008, 08:49 PM

Well the argument is that the word translated "brethren" includes cousins. Calvin makes this observation in his commentary on John 7:3, and in his commentary on Matthew 12:46-50, he talks about "Christ’s mother and cousins."

I thought maybe Calvin affirmed the perpetual virginity of Mary in one of his sermons, but I'm probably mistaken.

NaphtaliPress · #4 (**permalink**) 02-03-2008, 08:54 PM

Here's an earlier thread on this.
Was Mary a virgin?

Thomas2007 · #5 (**permalink**) 02-03-2008, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bookslover

Quote:

Originally Posted by amishrockstar

Any thoughts on this? Does anyone know of a place where he clearly gave a 'positive' statement, something like "Mary continued to be a virgin after the birth of Christ?"
THANKS

If he did say that, he's wrong. Mary remained a virgin only until she gave birth to Jesus. She then, according to the New Testament, had at least 3 other sons and 2 daughters. We are even given the boys' names.

I'm amazed that this is even controversial. But, thanks to the RCC...

I thought, and please correct me if I'm in err here, that the concept of her eternal virginity was a logical construct that is derived from the conjoining of the two doctrines of immaculate conception and her virginal conception of Christ by the Holy Ghost. Hence, logically, the eternal virginity is constructed since Christ is eternally begotten of the Father. Of course, I've never quite understood where they get the idea of immaculate conception, but the concept is necessarily conditional upon it, and I don't know of any Reformed theologians that ever held to it.

etexas · #6 (**permalink**) 02-03-2008, 11:02 PM

According to understanding via Talmud Mary would not have been "Virgin" after the Birth of Christ! A Hassie (Hassidic) would believe that the birth "revoked" the status of virginity.

armourbearer · #7 (**permalink**) 02-03-2008, 11:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas2007

and I don't know of any Reformed theologians that ever held to it.

The perpetual virginity of Mary was generally accepted by reformed theologians as "traditional" without making it dogma. See the William Perkins quotation in the thread linked by Chris. There is also another thread on the subject where Turretin is quoted to the same effect: The Waldenses

Thomas2007 · #8 (**permalink**) 02-04-2008, 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by armourbearer

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas2007

and I don't know of any Reformed theologians that ever held to it.

The perpetual virginity of Mary was generally accepted by reformed theologians as "traditional" without making it dogma. See the William Perkins quotation in the thread linked by Chris. There is also another thread on the subject where Turretin is quoted to the same effect.

Hello Reverand Winzer,

I'm sorry if my poor syntax caused confusion - what I meant was I don't know of any Reformed theologians that ever held to immaculate conception. Thus, holding to the concept of her eternal virginity makes absolutely no sense to me without also holding to immaculate conception.

I did read several posts in the linked thread, I looked at several of the arguments and they didn't make a lot of sense to me. Matthew 1:25 reads:

"And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS."

This clearly teaches that they didn't enjoy the union of their marriage until after Christ's birth, but He is clearly the firstborn unto Mary, so she had other children. There are also legal problems to hold that Christ was born unto a woman, made under the law (e.g. Gal 4:5), if Joseph never consummated the marriage covenant with Mary after Christ's birth, as Christ redeemed us unto adoption as sons.

armourbearer · #9 (**permalink**) 02-04-2008, 12:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas2007

but He is clearly the firstborn unto Mary, so she had other children.

The "firstborn" is a legal reality whether there are other children or not.

bookslover · #10 (**permalink**) 02-04-2008, 12:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas2007

I thought, and please correct me if I'm in err here, that the concept of her eternal virginity was a logical construct that is derived from the conjoining of the two doctrines of immaculate conception and her virginal conception of Christ by the Holy Ghost. Hence, logically, the eternal virginity is constructed since Christ is eternally begotten of the Father. Of course, I've never quite understood where they get the idea of immaculate conception, but the concept is necessarily conditional upon it, and I don't know of any Reformed theologians that ever held to it.

The "immaculate conception" is not a biblical doctrine. There isn't a shred of evidence for it, and it is theologically ridiculous. Again, it was something cooked up the RCC.

Semper Fidelis · #11 (**permalink**) 02-04-2008, 01:22 AM

I'm not going to argue with a particular fellow on this as we already discussed this in times past. I find the "traditional" argument unpersuasive. The "tradition" in the matter seems to go out of its way to protect Mary's virginity as if to suggest otherwise would be impious. Given the early history of the Christian Church this is not surprising but I don't agree with Augustine that virginity is a 100 on the pious lifestyle scale where married life is a 30.

SRoper · #12 (**permalink**) 02-04-2008, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by etexas

According to understanding via Talmud Mary would not have been "Virgin" after the Birth of Christ! A Hassie (Hassidic) would believe that the birth "revoked" the status of virginity.

Not familiar with the Talmud, so I'll have to guess what you are referencing, but at least some of the supporters of the immaculate conception believe Mary was still intact after giving birth to Jesus.