The Miraculous and Painless Birth of Jesus Christ PDF Print E-mail
Written by Mark Miravalle   
Saturday, 10 February 2007 00:00

St. Thomas Aquinas explains that Jesus as God was the only-begotten Son of the Father, an only-begotten Son of such unfathomable dignity as God the Son. When Jesus became man, he likewise deserved to be an "only-begotten" Son of his human Mother. The singular nature refers to Christ's special dignity as the God-man. Also, the virginal womb of Mary is the shrine of the Holy Spirit, and a human conception following the miraculous conception by the Holy Spirit would not respect its sacred and unique seed of precedence. St. Thomas adds that it would be unthinkable that Mary, after her miraculous virginal conception and her miraculous virginal birth, would forfeit her God-protected gift of virginity after the birth of Jesus. (20)

Mary was to be for all ages the perfect example of Christian discipleship in a complete gift of self to God, as well as a perfect model of the Church, which is both a virgin and a mother. Mary's virginity would need to be preserved in imitation of the virginity of Jesus himself, and as a perfect example to later disciples of the Church that holy virginity is the highest objective vocational gift of self to God.

But again, Mary's Perpetual Virginity possesses its greatest importance because it safeguards and respects the unprecedented and incomparably sacred event of God becoming man, "born of a woman" (Gal 4:4). Mary, therefore, did not have marital relations or other children to safeguard the uniqueness of the first Child.

The principal objection to Mary's Perpetual Virginity is the scriptural references to the "brethren of the Lord" (cf. Mt 12:46ff, 13:55, Mk3:31ff, etc.) The Greek word for brother, "adelphos," is often used in the Bible to mean cousin, close relative, or even "kinsman," someone from one's home town or village. There are, in fact, several instances in Sacred Scripture where "adelphos," or its Hebrew parallel term "ah," is used, and in a context where it cannot denote a blood brother relationship. For example, Lot and Abraham are referred to as "brothers" in Genesis 13:8, but a few verses earlier it is revealed that their relationship is actually one of cousins (cf. Gen 12:5). A similar parallel is evident when Jacob and Laban are called "brothers" (Gen 29:15), but they are actually uncle and nephew (cf. Gen 29:10). Certainly the one hundred and twenty "brothers" mentioned in Acts 1:15 did not all have the same mother.

Moreover, had the Blessed Virgin had other children, Jesus would not have entrusted her to John at the foot of the cross (cf. Jn 19:26-27)—he would have given her into the care of her other sons or daughters, according to Jewish custom, and not to someone outside the family.

The term "brethren" of Jesus in the New Testament would thereby refer to his cousins, his near relatives, and possibly his close followers or his disciples, as Christians today still refer to each other as "brothers and sisters" in the Lord.

Another objection to Mary's Perpetual Virginity is based on the reference to Christ as the "first-born" son of Mary (Lk 2:7). It has been argued that this must mean Mary had other children after Jesus. The term first-born, however, does not necessarily mean that other children must have followed the first-born. For every first child born to parents is a "first-born" child, regardless of whether other children follow or not. As St. Jerome stated: "Every only child is a first-born child, but not every first-born is an only child." (21)

Finally, some would argue that if the marriage between Mary and Joseph was never consummated, then it would not have been a true marriage or would have been unnatural. However, the essence of the marriage bond between husband and wife is their complete and unconditional gift of self and union of heart, of which the physical union is a concrete sign. If for a good and holy reason husband and wife should choose to refrain from relations, either for a time or permanently (under exceptional circumstances), this would not invalidate a marriage or affect its true bond, which is rooted not in the physical but in the spiritual union of the spouses.

There are numerous examples in Scripture where God asks married couples to renounce relations. In the Old Testament we have Moses requesting continence from the Israelites in preparation for the arrival of God (Ex 19:15). The levitical priests were commanded by God to abstain during the time when they exercised their duties in the temple, and David and his men were only allowed to eat of the holy bread if they had been abstaining from women (1 Sam 21:5). In the New Testament, St. Paul also writes that on occasion abstinence could be helpful in aiding us in our prayer life (1 Cor 7:5). In all of these examples, we have present the theme of refraining from the marital act because of the presence of that which is holy or sacred. Again, there is nothing wrong and much beautiful in itself with the physical love of spouses expressed for one another, but these scriptural examples show that when men and women are near to God and what he is sanctified, it can also be appropriate for them to respond by giving of themselves directly and undividedly to God. If in these cases it was fitting that men and women should remain abstinent, it can hardly be surprising that present before the great miracle of the Incarnation, Mary and Joseph chose to remain permanently virginal as well. (22)


This article was excerpted from Introduction to Mary: The Heart of Marian Doctrine and Devotion, Queenship, Third Edition, June 2006, and is available from Queenship Publishing at 1-800-647-9882, www.queenship.org., or PO Box 220, Goleta, California, 93116, U.S.A.

Notes

(1) DS 256.

(2) St. Augustine, Serm. 189, No.2; PL 38, 1005.

(3) Furthermore, it follows that Mary's birth of Jesus would be a painless experience, since pain in childbirth is a punitive effect of original sin (cf. Gen 3:15). Mary, being free from the penalty of original sin due to her Immaculate Conception, would likewise be free from the penalty of a painful process of childbirth.

(4) St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, III, Q. 28, a. 2.

(5) Cf. Carol, Fundamentals, p, 147; Carol, "Mary's Virginity in Partu," Homiletic and Pastoral Review, 54, 1954.

(6) Pope St. Leo, Enchiridion Patristicum (EP) 2182.

(7) DS 1880; Jacques Dupuis, ed., The Christian Faith in the Doctrinal Documents of the Catholic Church, sixth revised and enlarged edition, Alba House, 1998, No. 707.

(8) Robert I. Bradley, S.J. and Eugene Kevane, eds., The Roman Catechism, St. Paul Editions, 1985, 49-50.

(9) Pius XII, Encyclical Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943, No. 110; Acta Apostolicae Sedis (AAS)35, 1943.

(10) Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 499.

(11) Cf. St. Ephraem, Explanatio evangelii concordantis, cap. 2, No. 6, cap. 5, No. 7, cap. 2, No. 11; Burghart, "Mary in Eastern Patristic Thought," Mariology, II, pp. 114-115; St. Ambrose, De inst. Virg et S. Mariae virginitate perpetua; St. Jerome, De perpetua virginitate B. Mariae adv. Helvidium; St. Augustine, De haeresibus 56, 84; Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, p. 207.

(12) DS 91; cf. Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, p. 206.

(13) Pope St. Leo, Sermo 22, 2; PL 54, 195-196.

(14) DS 1880; Dupuis, The Christian Faith in the Doctrinal Documents of the Catholic Church No. 707.

(15) DS 214, 218, 227; cf. Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, p. 206.

(16) Cf. Collins, S.J., "Our Lady's Vow of Virginity," Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 5, 1943.

(17) Cf. Arthur B. Calkins, "The Virginitas in Partu," Fellowship of Catholic Scholars Quarterly, Vol. 26, No. 1 (Winter 2003) 10-13.

(18) Cf. Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, pp. 204.

(19) Martin Luther, Wiemar edition of Martin Luther's Works, trans. William J. Cole, 11, p. 320; John Calvin, cf. Bernard Leeming, "Protestants and Our Lady," Marian Library Studies, January 1967, p. 9; John Wesley, Letter to a Roman Catholic; Ulrich Zwingli, Zwingli Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Vol. 1, 424.

(20) St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica III, Q. 28, a. 3.

(21) De perpetua virginitate B. Mariae, No. 10; PL 23:192B.

(22) Cf. J. Evert, "Mary's Perpetual Virginity," www.motherofallpeoples.com.



 

Shopping Cart

VirtueMart
Your Cart is currently empty.

Store


The Immaculate Conception and the Co-redemptrix (PDF)
The Immaculate Conception and the Co-redemptrix (PDF)
$4.95



Introduction to Medjugorje
Introduction to Medjugorje
$8.95



Editors | Contributors

Cardinal Patron:
Luis Cardinal Aponte Martínez

Editor: Mark Miravalle, S.T.D.

Assistant Editors:
Kevin Clarke
Martin LaMartina
Emily Stimpson

Youth Editor:
Christopher Padgett

Contributing Authors:
Jonathan Baker
Msgr. Arthur B. Calkins
Fr. Maximilian Mary Dean, F.I.
Ambassador Howard Dee
Jason Evert
Fr. Robert Fox
Scott Hahn, Ph.D. 
Fr. Stefano Manelli, F.I.
Msgr. Charles Mangan
Fr. James McCurry, O.F.M.Conv. 
Michael O'Brien
Order of the Sacred and Immaculate Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Webmaster:
Christopher Wendt