A Protestant inquirer recently wrote the Orthodox Christian Information Center to ask why it is a dogma of the Orthodox Church that the Blessed Virgin Mary is ever-virgin. This page was compiled as a response.
Two dogmas
concerning the Mother of God are bound up, in closest fashion, with the dogma
of God the Words becoming a man. They are: a) Her Ever-virginity, and b) Her
name of Theotokos. They proceed immediately from the dogma of the unity of the
Hypostasis of the Lord from the moment of His Incarnation – the Divine
Hypostasis.
The birth of
the Lord Jesus Christ from a Virgin is testified to directly and deliberately
by two Evangelists, Matthew and Luke. This dogma was included into the Symbol
of Faith of the First Ecumenical Council, where we read: Who for the sake of us men and for our salvation came down from heaven
and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became man.
The Ever-virginity of the Mother of God is testified by Her own words, handed
down in the Gospel, where she expressed awareness of the immeasurable majesty
and height of Her chosenness: My soul
doth magnify the Lord... For behold, from henceforth all generations shall call
me blessed... For He that is mighty hath done to me great things; and holy is
His Name (Luke, 1:46-49).
The Most Holy
Virgin preserved in her memory and in her heart both the announcement of the
Archangel Gabriel and the inspired words of righteous Elizabeth when she was
visited by Mary: And whence is this to me, that the Mother of my Lord should
come to Me? (Luke 1:43); both the prophecy of the righteous Symeon on meeting
the Infant Jesus in the Temple, and the prophecy of the righteous Anna on the
same day (Luke 2:25-38). In connection with the account of the shepherds of
Bethlehem concerning the words of the angels to them, and of the singing of the
angels, the Evangelist adds: But Mary kept all these things, and pondered them
in her heart (Luke 2:19). The same Evangelist, having told of the conversation
of the Divine Mother with the twelve-year-old Jesus after their visit to
Jerusalem on the Feast of Pascha, ends his account with the words: But His
mother kept all these sayings in her heart (Luke 2:51). The Evangelists speak
also of the understanding of the majesty of her service in the world by the
righteous Joseph, her espoused husband, whose actions were many times guided by
an angel.
When the
heretics and simple blasphemers refuse to acknowledge the Ever-virginity of the
Mother of God on the grounds that the Evangelists mention the "brothers
and sisters of Jesus", they are refuted by the following facts from the
Gospel:
a) in the
Gospels there are named four "brothers" (James, Joseph, Simon and
Jude), and there are also mentioned the "sisters" of Jesus – no fewer
than three, as is evident in the words: and His sisters, are they not ALL with
us? (Matthew, 13:56).
b) in the
account of the journey to Jerusalem of the twelve-year-old boy Jesus, where
there is mention of the "kinsfolk and acquaintances" (Luke, 2:44) in
the midst of whom they were seeking Jesus, and where it is likewise mentioned
that Mary and Joseph every year journeyed from faraway Galilee to Jerusalem, no
reason is given to think that there were present other younger children with
Mary: it was thus that the first twelve years of the Lord's earthly life
proceeded.
c) when, about
twenty years after the above-mentioned journey, Mary stood at the cross of the
Lord, she was alone, and she was entrusted by her Divine Son to His disciple
John; and from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home (John,
19:27). Evidently, as the ancient Christians also understood it, the
Evangelists speak either of "half' brothers and sisters or of cousins.
From Fr. Michael Pomazansky, trans. Fr. Seraphim Rose,
Orthodox Dogmatic Theology (Platina, CA: St. Herman of Alaska Brotherhood,
1994), pp. 187-189.
The seedless
birth of Christ can and could be denied only by those who deny the Gospel,
whereas the Church of Christ from of old confesses Christ incarnate of the Holy
Spirit and the Virgin Mary. But the birth of God from the Ever-Virgin was a
stumbling stone for those who wished to call themselves Christians but did not
wish to humble themselves in mind and be zealous for purity of life. The pure
life of Mary was a reproach for those who were impure also in their thoughts.
So as to show themselves Christians, they did not dare to deny that Christ was
born of a Virgin, but they began to affirm that Mary remained a virgin only until
she brought forth her first-born son, Jesus (Matthew, 1:25).
It is likewise
incorrect to think that the brothers and sisters of Christ were the children of
His Most Holy Mother. The names of "brother" and "sister"
have several distinct meanings. Signifying a certain kinship between people or
their spiritual closeness, these words are used sometimes in a broader, and
sometimes in a narrower sense. In any case, people are called brothers or
sisters if they have a common father and mother, or only a common father or
mother; or even if they have different fathers and mothers, if their parents
later (having become widowed) have entered into marriage (stepbrothers); or if
their parents are bound by close degrees of kinship.
In the Gospel
it can nowhere be seen that those who are called there the brothers of Jesus
were or were considered the children of His Mother. On the contrary, it was
known that James and others were the sons of Joseph, the Betrothed of Mary, who
was a widower with children from his first wife. (St. Epiphanius of Cyprus,
Panarion, 78.) Likewise, the sister of His Mother, Mary the wife of Cleopas,
who stood with Her at the Cross of the Lord (John, 19:25), also had children,
who in view of such close kinship with full right could also be called brothers
of the Lord. That the so-called brothers and sisters of the Lord were not the
children of His Mother is clearly evident from the fact that the Lord entrusted
His Mother before His death to His beloved disciple John. Why should He do this
if She had other children besides Him? They themselves would have taken care of
Her. The sons of Joseph did not consider themselves obliged to take care of one
they regarded as their stepmother, or at least did not have for Her such love
as blood children have for parents, and such as the adopted John had for Her.
Thus, a careful
study of Sacred Scripture reveals with complete clarity the insubstantiality of
the objections against the Ever-Virginity of Mary and puts to shame those who
teach differently.
From St. John (Maxomovitch), The Orthodox Veneration
of Mary, The Birthgiver of God (Platina, CA: St. Herman of Alaska Brotherhood,
1994), pp. 31-33.
Source: http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/evervirgin.aspx
CONVERSATION