I was just responding in another thread to a good answer I received about Mary being ever virgin. From what I gather Mary did this to serve God fully, to be a devoted mother to Jesus, to be a role model for future Christians and because to live a celibate life is to be in a holier state. See 1 Corinthians 7:32-35.
However I want to ask about the scriptual defence that is used alongside the traditional one.
A constant argument I hear from Catholics when defending the perpetual virginity of Mary is that Jesus appeared to give her to St. John to look after her because she was now a widow and her only Son was about to die on the Cross, and why would Jesus have asked John (a non-relative) to look after her if she had other children?
However, now I have a question I have thought about right around the time of my last post:
How would a Catholic defend an argument that says Mary didnt remain a virgin, but just was not able to bear other children? Or that she lived a normal married life, but it was God’s will that she didnt have any more children?
I feel the Catholics have a reasonable scriptural argument to defend Mary being ever virgin, even though some attempts have been made by Protestants. However I feel the argument stood firm, until the question like the one I posted above is thrown in, because the proof about a non-relative looking after Mary after Jesus died is no longer relevant.
Thanks for your responses