Mary DID have other children


#1

One area of disagreement between Catholics and Protestants is on the question of whether Mary had other children besides Jesus. Luke 2:7 calls Jesus Mary’s firstborn. This does not imply that she has children after Jesus because the term firstborn is a legal declaration that implies all the rights and priveleges of a firstborn son, wether an only child or not. However, Protestants point to such scriptures as Mark 6:3. “Is he not the carpenter, the son of Mary, and the brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? And are not his sisters here with us?” Protestant Christians point out that Mary, based on scriptures such as this, did indeed have other children. Although I will show that Mary does have other children, and the Bible clearly teaches it, scriptures such as these do not prove the point.

First of all, the Greek word “adelphos” for brother is used in the New Testament to refere to any kinsman, not just brother. A second argument against using scriptures mentioning Jesus’ brothers is found in John 19:26-27.
“When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple there whom he loved, he said to his mother, ‘Woman, behold, your son.’ Then he said to the disciple, ‘Behold, your mother.’ And from that hour the disciple took her into his home.” If Mary had other sons then they certainly would be the one’s responsible for taking care of their mother. What an insult for Jesus to offer their mother to someone who isn’t even a blood relative.

Based on these arguments, the Catholics have a better claim to Mary’s perpetual virginity. However, I would like to share some scriptures that clearly prove that Mary has other children.

As pointed out above, Luke 2:7 says that Mary “…gave birth to her firstborn son.” If Jesus is the firstborn, who then are Mary’s children who follow the firstborn? In Romans 8:28-29 Paul tells us that “we know that all things work for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose. For those he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, so that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.”

The Bible declares that Jesus is the firstborn and that we, his followers, are his many brothers. Jesus is the firstborn son of Mary and we then are Her many children.

In Colossians 1:15 Paul goes on to tell us that Jesus “is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.” When Catholics call Mary “Mother” and when they refer to Her as the Mother of all people, they are simply echoing what the scriptures teach us. Jesus is our brother, Mary is His Mother. He is our firstborn brother and we share the same Mother as he. In fact, the book of Revelation declares that Christians are the offspring of Mary our Mother. (Revelation 12:17).

Did Mary have other children? Indeed she did and we are those children.


#2

um no offense dork but noone even brought that stale topic up—it has been discussed time and time again about the word “until” can u say beat a dead horse


#3

Despite the Baltimore Catechism, a Catholic Grade School education and a degree from Notre Dame, I was led astray on this issue, as well as the Whore of Babylon thing, for 23 yrs.

It is only after praying the Holy Rosary every day for a year that I have begun to peel that onion.

The truth is, and I was a red hot born again at one time, I now understand that if you have a relationship with Christ without Mary, you are ignoring his most wonderful and spectacular supernatural gift.

Christ was busy on the day of His Crucifixion, but he did not finish the work of Redemption until he bequeathed us his Mother.

And only the Disciple who stood next to His Mother, had the strength to endure to the end with Our Lord and share in the Sorrow and Victory of Calvary.

Protestants stand anchored in their interpretation of Romans and look back at the Cross as a mere transaction.

Ancient and Holy Christianity anchors itself in the Incarnation, because we are not saved by the Cross only, but by the whole life of Jesus.

Thomas Howard correctly observes in "Evangelical is Not Enough’, that for all the good, and there is much, in the Puritan Heart, at a basic level it does not own the Incarnation and it leaves them with a kind of Manichaen spirituality.

Which is why fundamentalists get so intense about ‘separation’ and have a cow when they see a Catholics enjoying brews. It is why they see their churches as mini Arks for the Elect, instead of hospitals for sinners.

It is funny that they think of us as ‘legalistic’. Put three fundamentalist together in a bible study and discuss any important mystery, like predestination, and you will get four new opinions and five new churches.

Mary is a sign of the Church and a force for unity. So is the Holy Eucharist.

Have you noticed that no matter how ‘orthodox’ on doctrine asacramental fundamentalists are, they tend to become very mean spirited, proud and divisive. And as we move up to Methodists, Episcopals, Orthodox and Coptics, as they come closer to us in teaching on Mary and Eucharist, they become more charitable, more unified and more at peace with the good things God has made for us?

I think fundamentalists need a mommy to learn how to behave, and they should take John 6 more literally and Gen 1 a little less so.

Steve


#4

[quote=ICXCNIKA] Did Mary have other children? Indeed she did and we are those children.
[/quote]

Thanks for this great post, putting this in a new and true light.


#5

Yes, Yes ! Mary had other children, she had step-children.

When Joseph was given Mary by the Temple priests Joseph was an elderly man. Joseph had children from his first wife who was dead.

Jesus was the one and only child Mary bore. But Jesus had step brothers.
Most Protestants claim that Mary bore children other than Jesus. To support their claim, these Protestants refer to the biblical passages which mention the “brethren of the Lord.” As explained in the Catholic Answers tract Brethren of the Lord, neither the Gospel accounts nor the early Christians attest to the notion that Mary bore other children besides Jesus. The faithful knew, through the witness of Scripture and Tradition, that Jesus was Mary’s only child and that she remained a lifelong virgin.

Someone asked about Matt1:24-25. To lift that passage out of the Bible and to transliterate into modern English is to ignore everything written before and after those two verses were written. To lift them out of the Bible as if this was the only thing known about Mary is meaningless. If I lifted, ”Jesus wept” from the Bible and nothing after or before then one would conclude that the only thing Jesus did was to weep! Ludicrous! It was a Jewish custom for young girls to have the duty of keeping the Temple in order and clean.
As a child Mary was one of those girls. Ann, her mother was told that Mary had a very special duty in life. Also it was common for elderly men to be the keeper of these Temple girls, to give them shelter and food. Before Mary ever saw Joseph she knew her life would be special. Joseph was chosen from several old men one day. They were doing their duty. It is said that a dove flew to Joseph’s head and he was picked, this isn’t Biblical, it is extra-Biblical. It was understood by Joseph that he and Mary would live as brother and sister. The Jewish Priests condoned that. One may say that is unusual, but to be the mother of Jesus is infinitely more unusual!

*Why when Jesus was on the cross did he say, ”Mother, behold your son”? It was Jewish custom for the son’s of a mother to take care of her. She had no other sons. So Jesus gave John the task of caring for Mary. See John XIX:26 – 27. Yes, Jesus said to John, “Son behold your Mother”.

An important historical document which supports the teaching of Mary’s perpetual virginity is the Protoevangelium of James, which was written probably less than sixty years after the conclusion of Mary’s earthly life (around A.D. 120), when memories of her life were still vivid in the minds of many.

According to the world-renowned patristics scholar, Johannes Quasten: “The principal aim of the whole writing *Protoevangelium of James] *is to prove the perpetual and inviolate virginity of Mary before, in, and after the birth of Christ” (Patrology, 1:120–1).


#6

[quote=ICXCNIKA]Did Mary have other children? Indeed she did and we are those children.
[/quote]

Thank you for a touching and well-put post. :slight_smile:


#7

One area of disagreement between Catholics and Protestants is on the question of whether Mary had other children besides Jesus.

While this is true now this was not always the case. Luther, Calvin Zwingli and the Cramner all beleived in the perpetual virginity of the Mary the mother of God. In essense all the original reformers beleived this dogma that is thought of a catholic only invention. Historically this was not the case. But with like many things in Protestnatism it has changed and been watered down the supernatural aspect of the relationship between Mary and Jesus.
The Refomers using sola scriptura believed in Mary’s perpeutal virginity so its not that far fetched as evangeliclas will lead you to believe.


#8

[quote=ICXCNIKA]One area of disagreement between Catholics and Protestants is on the question of whether Mary had other children besides Jesus. Luke 2:7 calls Jesus Mary’s firstborn. This does not imply that she has children after Jesus because the term firstborn is a legal declaration that implies all the rights and priveleges of a firstborn son, wether an only child or not. However, Protestants point to such scriptures as Mark 6:3. “Is he not the carpenter, the son of Mary, and the brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? And are not his sisters here with us?” Protestant Christians point out that Mary, based on scriptures such as this, did indeed have other children. Although I will show that Mary does have other children, and the Bible clearly teaches it, scriptures such as these do not prove the point.

First of all, the Greek word “adelphos” for brother is used in the New Testament to refere to any kinsman, not just brother. A second argument against using scriptures mentioning Jesus’ brothers is found in John 19:26-27.
“When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple there whom he loved, he said to his mother, ‘Woman, behold, your son.’ Then he said to the disciple, ‘Behold, your mother.’ And from that hour the disciple took her into his home.” If Mary had other sons then they certainly would be the one’s responsible for taking care of their mother. What an insult for Jesus to offer their mother to someone who isn’t even a blood relative.

Based on these arguments, the Catholics have a better claim to Mary’s perpetual virginity. However, I would like to share some scriptures that clearly prove that Mary has other children.

As pointed out above, Luke 2:7 says that Mary “…gave birth to her firstborn son.” If Jesus is the firstborn, who then are Mary’s children who follow the firstborn? In Romans 8:28-29 Paul tells us that “we know that all things work for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose. For those he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, so that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.”

The Bible declares that Jesus is the firstborn and that we, his followers, are his many brothers. Jesus is the firstborn son of Mary and we then are Her many children.

In Colossians 1:15 Paul goes on to tell us that Jesus “is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.” When Catholics call Mary “Mother” and when they refer to Her as the Mother of all people, they are simply echoing what the scriptures teach us. Jesus is our brother, Mary is His Mother. He is our firstborn brother and we share the same Mother as he. In fact, the book of Revelation declares that Christians are the offspring of Mary our Mother. (Revelation 12:17).

Did Mary have other children? Indeed she did and we are those children.
[/quote]

That post was like a movie. There were twists and turns I didn.t expect.:smiley: I thought you were attacking the perpetual virginity of Mary at first.


#9

[quote=jimmy]That post was like a movie. There were twists and turns I didn.t expect.:smiley: I thought you were attacking the perpetual virginity of Mary at first.
[/quote]

I agree well done well said and if you dont mind it will be well used by me later.

thanks
Scott


#10

Loved it. As one who is recently Catholic (just this year at Vigil) I was taught for years that Mary was “just a girl”, no big deal there. Thankfully my parents sent me to Catholic schools, so I knew that this could not be true. This was a refreshing look at a belief of our faith that I have come to embrace with joy.

Thank you.


#11

[quote=Exporter] It was understood by Joseph that he and Mary would live as brother and sister. The Jewish Priests condoned that. One may say that is unusual, but to be the mother of Jesus is infinitely more unusual!
[/quote]

[/font] Actually you’re thinking it unusual based on current society. Living under a vow of virginity was very common among Jews of Jesus’ time. It was so common that there were “Laws” about how they were to be treated. Read Numbers chapter 30 carefully. It explains what a father of a woman under such a vow must do, it continues on to what a man must do if he takes a woman, under such a vow, into his house as his wife. Mary was under a vow of virginity when Joseph took her into his house as his wife (Mt, chap 1). He accepted this vow and he was bound by Law to never have her break this vow. I suppose someone could argue that perhaps Joseph and Mary decided to break the law and have sexual relations after the birth of Jesus, but that is so highly doubtful, can you imagine two very good Jews, each visited by an angel, being told they would be the “parents” of the Son of God. Sure, then they decide to break Gods law and have sex??? NOT


#12

A really interesting thread. And what Tom says brings up some interesting speculations. If Mary was always to be a virgin, how were the Holy Family viewed? They may have tried to explain their situation to friends and neighbors, but who would have believed them? Isn’t it likely they were outcasts? Some of their family understood as evidenced by the Visitation, but did all their family? Was the Visitation in part a way for Mary to take refuge with the only people who would understand what was going on?

Would their synagogue understand? I think that’s more doubtful than any understanding from their families. When they came back from Egypt did they go back to where they started out, or was Nazareth a place to start over? It seems I remember that at least Mary was not originally from Nazareth.

It all highlights what sacrifices Mary and Joseph must have made and how hard it was for them.


#13

That was a very helpful post for me, ICXCNIKA, as were some of the others on this thread.

I have had no problem seeing Mary as the Queen of Heaven, the Mother of God, and in a sense the Queen Mother of Heaven. But, I have tended to view her as a serf would view his Queen: soneone august, unapproachable, and far removed from the little field i toil in. Certainly not someone to invite over for a beer and a burger!

But slowly I am beginning to see her as my mother as well. I don’t have a very close relationship with my mother. Hard to do that when your mother dies when you are 2 :slight_smile:


#14

[quote=oldfogey] If Mary was always to be a virgin, how were the Holy Family viewed? They may have tried to explain their situation to friends and neighbors, but who would have believed them? Isn’t it likely they were outcasts?
[/quote]

No, you missed the point, they would not have been outcast, and actually they never would have thought of mentioning it. That’s the point, it was not uncommon. It was so common that they had Laws governing it. I know it sounds strange in our society, but it wasn’t then. If you look at Mt chap 1 you’ll see Joseph rationalizes taking her into his house after the angel of God explains how she became pregnant. In this he realizes that in actuality, God, the Holy Spirit, is the “Father” of the child. This gives him one more reason to never have sexual relations with Mary; she is actually the “bride” of the Holy Spirit. Remember back then a marriage was a contract, an agreement, she agreed to bear a child with the Holy Spirit (Lk Chap 1). So ya think ole Joe is going to commit adultery with God’s wife? Sorry for the humor.

[quote=oldfogey] Some of their family understood as evidenced by the Visitation, but did all their family? Was the Visitation in part a way for Mary to take refuge with the only people who would understand what was going on?
[/quote]

I doubt that Mary and Joseph told anyone except the Rabbis in the synagogue. Elizabeth obviously did not know until Mary arrived and the babe in her womb leapt.

[quote=oldfogey] Would their synagogue understand? I think that’s more doubtful than any understanding from their families.
[/quote]

There are some extra canonical writings, which address the Rabbis reaction. They (the writings) being not cannon can’t be relied on. In one I read the Rabbis accused Joseph of “violating” Mary since they did not understand how this (her pregnancy) happened. This also explains the woman who witnessed His arrival in the synagogue, she heard prior to His arrival.
This is such a totally life changing experience, please please please, research all you can.


#15

[quote=ICXCNIKA]One area of disagreement between Catholics and Protestants is on the question of whether Mary had other children besides Jesus. Luke 2:7 calls Jesus Mary’s firstborn. This does not imply that she has children after Jesus because the term firstborn is a legal declaration that implies all the rights and priveleges of a firstborn son, wether an only child or not. However, Protestants point to such scriptures as Mark 6:3. “Is he not the carpenter, the son of Mary, and the brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? And are not his sisters here with us?” Protestant Christians point out that Mary, based on scriptures such as this, did indeed have other children. Although I will show that Mary does have other children, and the Bible clearly teaches it, scriptures such as these do not prove the point.

First of all, the Greek word “adelphos” for brother is used in the New Testament to refere to any kinsman, not just brother. A second argument against using scriptures mentioning Jesus’ brothers is found in John 19:26-27.
“When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple there whom he loved, he said to his mother, ‘Woman, behold, your son.’ Then he said to the disciple, ‘Behold, your mother.’ And from that hour the disciple took her into his home.” If Mary had other sons then they certainly would be the one’s responsible for taking care of their mother. What an insult for Jesus to offer their mother to someone who isn’t even a blood relative.

Based on these arguments, the Catholics have a better claim to Mary’s perpetual virginity. However, I would like to share some scriptures that clearly prove that Mary has other children.

As pointed out above, Luke 2:7 says that Mary “…gave birth to her firstborn son.” If Jesus is the firstborn, who then are Mary’s children who follow the firstborn? In Romans 8:28-29 Paul tells us that “we know that all things work for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose. For those he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, so that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.”

The Bible declares that Jesus is the firstborn and that we, his followers, are his many brothers. Jesus is the firstborn son of Mary and we then are Her many children.

In Colossians 1:15 Paul goes on to tell us that Jesus “is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.” When Catholics call Mary “Mother” and when they refer to Her as the Mother of all people, they are simply echoing what the scriptures teach us. Jesus is our brother, Mary is His Mother. He is our firstborn brother and we share the same Mother as he. In fact, the book of Revelation declares that Christians are the offspring of Mary our Mother. (Revelation 12:17).

Did Mary have other children? Indeed she did and we are those children.
[/quote]

Hi ICXCNIKA On reading your post I was intrigued about the passage John19:26-27 where Jesus spoke to Mary and John from the cross. As I am not catholic and dont understand where you find scripture to support your belief, John 19:26-27 did baffle me.
So I asked Jesus this evening. This is the information I received. Jesus publicly declared Mary and John as “son” and “mother” because Mary wanted to live in Jerusalem to be with His disciples. So to protect her good name, Jesus spoke, thus allowing Mary to reside with John without tarnishing her good name.
Thank you, oh great and mighty Holy Spirit,
Christ be with you
walk in love
edwinG


#16

[quote=edwinG] Jesus publicly declared Mary and John as “son” and “mother” because Mary wanted to live in Jerusalem to be with His disciples. So to protect her good name, Jesus spoke, thus allowing Mary to reside with John without tarnishing her good name.
[/quote]

If Jesus had any “blood” brothers, or Mary had any other biological children, it would have been with those children that she would have stayed, by Jewish law. This is another reason to believe she had no other biological children other than Jesus. in giving her to His Apostle, He also gives her to you and I as His brothers, she becomes our own mother in Jesus.


#17

Here is what I find funny about many of our protestnat brethren. They don’t beleive a person is capable of fulfilling a vow of virginity or chastity although people still do that todya witness Catholic and Orthodox monks, nuns, priest and even other relgions like Buddisht monks and nuns do this. Before our eyes we have people living out a vow of virginity. But ok they will not question the supernatural virign birth of Christ! Now that’s the miracle here not the fact that Mary had a vow of perpetual virginity. But they don’t question the miracle and something that has never happned before or since. But hey a vow of virginity now that’s impossible.

I find their postionis taken simply becuase the catholic church has taken the postion if catholcism would have taken she had children by Joseph out of spite they would have said she was ever virign. I am convinced they just like taking the opposite postion to deny the vladity of catholic tradition.


#18

[quote=Exporter]Yes, Yes ! Mary had other children, she had step-children.

When Joseph was given Mary by the Temple priests Joseph was an elderly man. Joseph had children from his first wife who was dead.

[/quote]

Where do you find evidence that St. Joseph had other children?


#19

Actually, then, I guess I don’t really know what the “point” was. It was common and there were laws governing it, but it would not have been mentioned? The Rabbis noticed, but they would not have been looked down upon?

Actually, I was just enjoying a thread not based on knowitallism and blowhardism, like many of the threads on these forums. Rather than going back to do research, I think I’ll spend more time in prayer. At least there won’t be sarcasm involved.


#20

mary is our spiritual mother, true. but that does not mean she was not a physical virgin.

We call god our father, but we do not claim we were all miraculously concieved


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.