Marys Perpetual Virginity
Confirmed by Quotations of Protestant Reformers
Note: Thanks to
Dave Armstrong and others from whom I have taken
these quotations.
John Calvin
“Helvidius displayed
excessive ignorance in concluding that Mary must have had many sons,
because Christ's 'brothers' are sometimes
mentioned.”
(Harmony of Matthew, Mark & Luke, sec. 39 [Geneva, 1562], vol. 2 / From
Calvin's Commentaries, tr. William Pringle, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans,
1949, p.215; on Matthew 13:55)
[On Matt 1:25:]
The inference he [Helvidius] drew from it was, that Mary remained a
virgin no longer than till her first birth, and that afterwards she had
other children by her husband . . . No just
and well-grounded inference can be drawn from these words . .
. as to what took place after the birth of Christ. He is called
'first-born'; but it is for the sole
purpose of informing us that he was born of a virgin . . . What took
place afterwards the historian does not inform us . . .
No man will obstinately keep up the argument,
except from an extreme fondness for disputation.
{Pringle,
ibid., vol. I, p. 107}
Under the word
'brethren' the Hebrews include all cousins and other
relations, whatever may be the degree of affinity.
{Pringle, ibid., vol. I, p. 283 / Commentary on John, (7:3) }
"There have been certain folk who have wished to
suggest that from this passage (Matt 1:25)
that the Virgin Mary had other children
than the Son of God, and that Joseph then dwelt with her later; but
what folly this is! For the gospel
writer did not wish to record what happened afterwards; he simply wished
to make clear Joseph's obedience and to show also that Joseph had been
well and truly assured that it was God who had sent His angel to Mary.
He had therefore never dwelt with her nor had he shared her
company....And besides this Our Lord Jesus Christ is called the
first-born. This is not because there
was a second or a third, but because the gospel writer is paying regard
to the precedence. Scripture speaks thus of naming the first-born
whether or not there was any question of the second."
(Sermon on Matthew
1:22-25, published 1562.)
Martin Luther :
Again throughout his life Luther held that Mary's
perpetual virginity was an article of faith for all Christians - and
interpreted Galatians 4:4 to mean that Christ was "born of a woman"
alone.
"It is an article of faith that Mary is Mother of
the Lord and still a Virgin."2
[2 Martin
Luther, op. cit., Volume 11, 319-320. ]
"There can be no doubt that the
Virgin Mary is in heaven. How it
happened we do not know." 4
[4 [Martin
Luther, Weimar edition of Martin Luther's Works (Translation by William
J. Cole) 10, p. 268. ]
"Helvidius has
shown himself too ignorant, in
saying that Mary had several sons, because mention is made in some
passages of the brothers of Christ."8
Calvin translated
"brothers" in this context to mean cousins or relatives.
[8 Bernard Leeming, "Protestants and Our Lady", Marian Library Studies,
January 1967, p.9. ]
Christ, our Savior, was the real and natural fruit
of Mary's virginal womb . . . This was without the cooperation of a man,
and she remained a virgin
after that.
{Luther's Works, eds.
Jaroslav Pelikan (vols. 1-30) & Helmut T. Lehmann (vols. 31-55), St.
Louis: Concordia Pub. House (vols. 1-30); Philadelphia: Fortress Press
(vols. 31-55), 1955, v.22:23 / Sermons on John, chaps. 1-4 (1539) }
Christ . . . was the only
Son of Mary, and the Virgin Mary bore no children besides Him . .
. I am inclined to agree with those who declare that
'brothers' really mean 'cousins' here,
for Holy Writ and the Jews always call cousins brothers.
{Pelikan,
ibid., v.22:214-15 / Sermons on John, chaps. 1-4 (1539) }
A new lie about me is being circulated. I am
supposed to have preached and written that Mary, the mother of God, was
not a virgin either before or after the birth of Christ . . .
{Pelikan,
ibid.,v.45:199 / That Jesus Christ was Born a Jew (1523) }
Scripture does not say or indicate that she later
lost her virginity . . .
When Matthew [1:25]
says that Joseph did not know Mary carnally until she had brought forth
her son, it does not follow that he knew her subsequently; on the
contrary, it means that he never did know her . . .
This babble . . . is without justification
. . . he has neither noticed nor paid any attention to either Scripture
or the common idiom.
{Pelikan,
ibid.,v.45:206,212-3 / That Jesus Christ was Born a Jew (1523) }
“Christ our Savior was the real and natural fruit
of Mary's virginal womb. . . . This was without the cooperation of a
man, and she remained a virgin after that.”
( Ref: Sermon
on John 14. 16. Luther's Works, (St. Louis, ed. Jaroslav, Pelican,
Concordia. vol. 24. p. 107)
"Christ our Savior was the real and natural fruit
of Mary's virginal womb...This was without the cooperation of a man, and
she remained a virgin after that."
(Luther's
Works 22, 23)
[Luther preached the perpetual virginity of Mary
throughout his life]
"...A virgin before the conception and birth, she
REMAINED a virgin also AT the birth and
AFTER it."
(February 2, 1546 Feast of Presentation of Christ in the Temple)
Christ . . . was the only Son of Mary, and the
Virgin Mary bore no children besides Him
. . . I am inclined to agree with those who declare that
'brothers' really mean 'cousins' here, for Holy Writ and the Jews always
call cousins brothers.
{Luther's
Works, eds. Jaroslav Pelikan (vols. 1-30) & Helmut T. Lehmann (vols.
31-55), St. Louis: Concordia Pub. House (vols. 1-30); Philadelphia:
Fortress Press (vols. 31-55), 1955, v.22:214-15 / Sermons on John,
chaps. 1-4 (1539) }
"Christ...was the only Son of Mary, and the
Virgin Mary bore no children besides
Him..."brothers" really means "cousins" here, for Holy Writ
and the Jews always call cousins brothers.
(Sermons on
John, chapters 1-4, 1537-39.)
Ulrich Zwingli:
"I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words
of the gospel as a pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and
in childbirth and after childbirth forever
remained a pure, intact Virgin."12
Zwingli used Exodus 4:22 to defend the doctrine of Mary's perpetual
virginity.
[12 Ulrich
Zwingli, Zwingli Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Volume 1, 424. ]
"I esteem immensely the
Mother of God, the
ever chaste, immaculate
Virgin Mary."13
[13 E.
Stakemeier, De Mariologia et Oecumenismo, K. Balic, ed., (Rome, 1962),
456.]
"
I firmly believe according to the words of the
gospel that a pure virgin brought forth for us the son of god and
remained a virgin pure
and intact in childbirth and also after the birth, for all
eternity. I firmly trust that she has been exalted by God to
eternal joy above all creatures, both the blessed and the angels."
(from Augustin
Bea "Mary and the Protestants" MARIAN STUDIES Apr 61)
"I speak of this in the holy Church of Zurich and
in all my writings: I recognize MARY AS
EVER VIRGIN AND HOLY."
(January
1528 in Berne)
"I esteem immensely the Mother of God, the
ever chaste, immaculate Virgin Mary....Christ...was
born of a most undefiled Virgin."
(Stakemeier,
E. in De Mariologia et Oecumenismo, Balic, K., ed., Rome, 1962, p. 456.)
Huldreich Zwingli
He turns, in September 1522, to a lyrical defense of the perpetual
virginity of the mother of Christ . . . To deny that Mary remained 'inviolata'
before, during and after the birth of her Son, was to doubt the
omnipotence of God . . . and it was right and profitable to repeat the
angelic greeting - not prayer - 'Hail Mary' . . . God esteemed Mary
above all creatures, including the saints and angels - it was her
purity, innocence and invincible faith that mankind must follow. Prayer,
however, must be . . . to God alone . . .
'Fidei expositio,' the last pamphlet from his pen .
. . There is a special insistence upon the
perpetual virginity of Mary.
{G.
R. Potter, Zwingli, London: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1976, pp.88-9,395 /
The Perpetual Virginity of Mary . . ., Sep. 17, 1522}
Zwingli had
printed in 1524 a sermon on 'Mary, ever
virgin, mother of God.'
{Max
Thurian (Protestant), Mary: Mother of all Christians, tr. Neville B.
Cryer, NY: Herder & Herder, 1963 (orig. 1962), p.76}
Heinrich Bullinger
Bullinger (d. 1575) . . . defends Mary's
perpetual virginity . . . and inveighs against the false
Christians who defraud her of her rightful praise: 'In Mary everything
is extraordinary and all the more glorious as it has sprung from pure
faith and burning love of God.' She is 'the most unique and the noblest
member' of the Christian community . . .
'The Virgin Mary . . . completely sanctified by the
grace and blood of her only Son and abundantly endowed by the gift of
the Holy Spirit and preferred to all . . . now lives happily with Christ
in heaven and is called and remains
ever-Virgin and Mother of God.'
{In
Hilda Graef, Mary: A History of Doctrine and Devotion, combined ed. of
vols. 1 & 2, London: Sheed & Ward, 1965, vol.2, pp.14-5}
John Wesley (Founder of Methodism)
I believe... he [Jesus Christ] was born of the
blessed Virgin, who, as well after as she brought him forth,
continued a pure and unspotted virgin.
{"Letter to a Roman Catholic," quoted in A. C. Coulter, John Wesley, New
York: Oxford University Press, 1964, 495}
Modern Protestant Historians :
Whatever may be the position theologically that one may take today on
the subject of Mariology, one is not able to call to one's aid 'reformed
tradition' unless one does it with the greatest care . . . the Marian
doctrine of the Reformers is consonant with the great tradition of the
Church in all the essentials and with that of the
Fathers of the first centuries in
particular . . . . .
In regard to the Marian doctrine of the Reformers,
we have already seen how unanimous they are in all that concerns
Mary's holiness and perpetual virginity
. . .
{Max Thurian
(Protestant), Mary: Mother of all Christians, tr. Neville B. Cryer, NY:
Herder & Herder, 1963 (orig. 1962), pp. 77, 197}
The title 'Ever
Virgin' (aeiparthenos,
semper virgo) arose early in Christianity . . . It was a stock phrase in
the Middle Ages and continued to be used in Protestant confessional
writings (Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Andrewes; Book of Concord [1580],
Schmalkaldic Articles [1537]).
{Raymond E.
Brown et al, ed., Mary in the New Testament, Phil.: Fortress Press / NY:
Paulist Press, 1978, p.65 (a joint Catholic-Protestant effort) }
Mary was formally separated from Protestant worship and prayer in the
16th century; in the 20th century the divorce is complete. Even the
singing of the 'Magnificat' caused the Puritans to have scruples, and if
they gave up the Apostles' Creed, it was not only because of the
offensive adjective 'Catholic', but also because of the mention of the
Virgin . . .
[But] Calvin, like
Luther and Zwingli, taught the perpetual virginity of Mary.
The early Reformers even applied, though with some reticence, the
title Theotokos to Mary . . . Calvin called on his followers to venerate
and praise her as the teacher who instructs them in her Son's commands.
{J.A. Ross
MacKenzie (Protestant), in Stacpoole, Alberic, ed., Mary's Place in
Christian Dialogue, Wilton, Conn.: Morehouse-Barlow, 1982, pp.35-6}
Return to
Mary's Perpetual
Virginity
|