(5) The fact that the brethren not only lived in the same house with the Virgin, but continually accompanied her wherever she went, is an indi- cation that they were her children as well as Joseph's.
Reply. — The tie which unites a stepmother and her step-sons is often extremely close, and con- sidering that Joseph was almost certainly dead before our Lord's ministry began, and that Jesus was fully occupied with public afiairs, it cannot be regarded as surprising that her step-sons (if such they were) constituted themselves her guardians and protectors.
I>. Arguments for the Epiphanian view. —
We shall now state the arguments for the theory of Epiphanius, and subject them to criticism from the Helvidian point of view.
(1) The Perpetual Virginity of Mary is implied in the narrative of the Annunciation (Lk l^o-ssj. The angel Gabriel appeared to Mary, and after saluting her as ' highly-favoured ' announced the manner of Christ's birth as follows : ' Behold, thou shalt conceive in the womb, and shalt bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus.' The reply of Mary was, ' How shall this be, seeing that I Inww not a man''.' (IIcjs larai tovto, tVei avSpa ov ywwdKiii ;). It is plain from this reply (1) that she understood the angel to mean that the child would be born in the natural way ; and (2) that there was some obstacle which prevented her fiom having a child in the natural way (' I know not a man,' ' S-pSpa oil yiviicrKoi '). These words cannot mean, ' I do not yet know a man.' That would have been no obstacle to the fulfilment of the promise. The angel's words related to the future (v."), and inasmuch as Mary was already betrothed (v.'"), and might shortly expect to be taken into her
236 BRETHREN OF THE LORD
BRETHREN OF THE LORD
husband's liouse, there was every prospect, so far as Mary's status went, that the angel's words would shortly be fulfilled. The only meanin", therefore, which in such a context Mary's words can bear, is that she had devoted herself (with her betrothed's consent) to a life of virginity, and that she expected to preserve, even in marriage, her virginal integrity (so nearly all the older ex- positors, including Ambrose, Augustine, Gregory of Nyssa, Theophylact, Bernard, Bede, Anselra, Aquinas, Cornelius a Lapide, Maldonatus, Grotius ; and in more recent times Bisping, Schegg, Schanz). *
Reply. — Such a vow or resolution is improbable in Marj's case, because the Jews regarded virginity as less honourable than marriage, and childless- ness as a calamity. Moreover, it is improbable that, if she had formed such a resolution, Joseph would have consented to be betrothed to her.
These objections are undeniably weighty, but they do not fully meet the strong exegetical argu- ment for the traditional view. Moreover, it must be remembered (1) that the case in question is a unique and peculiar one, and that it is doubtful how far the canons of ordinary probabUitv ought to be applied to it ; (2) that esteem for virginity among contemporary Jews is vouched for (though only to a limited extent) by the ^^Titings of PhUo, and the existence of the sect of the Essenes ; (3) that a high esteem for virginity characterized the Christian movement from the first (Ac 21', 1 Co 7), and formed part of the teaching of Christ (Mt 19'=) ; and consequently it is not incredible tliat Joseph and Mary, by whom Jesus was brought up, shared the sentiment, and communicated it to Him.
(2) Virginity is regarded, not only by Christians, but by nearly all men, as, ideally at any rate, superior to marriage. It is therefore probable that the most privileged and holiest of women remained ever a virgin, as has been believed by most Chris- tians from the first, t
Reply. — This argument has weight, but is not conclusive. For (1) though ideally virginity is superior to marriage, being the condition of the holy angels and of the saints in heaven (Mt 22^°), jfX practically marriage is in most cases to be pre- ferred to celibacy, as a more useful means of serving God. And since the estate of maiTiage is altogether holy, and is a religious mystery or sacrament, symbolizing the union between Christ and His Church (Eph 5**), it is consistent with the highest reverence towards our Lord's mother to
* This important passage is not alluded to bv Jlavor and Lightfoot, and is very inadequatel.v dealt with l>y most recent commentators. B. Weiss (Com. in loc.) savs Ihit it is ' a be- wildered question how she, the unstained maiden, ran possibly come into this position." Considering that she was already betrothed, no sucii bewilderment was possible. If the ani'ol had said that she would have a son bi-fore mni-./mic, surh h.-wilrk-r- ment would have been natural enough, firth, rnn^uhihi.^ of betrothed persons, though not exactlv fi.rl.i.l.h n, \\,,~ nil a]»- proved. But the angel had not hinted at lliis I.i I'luininir reproduces Weiss. Godet simply savs: ■lln .|ii.s1m,ti )-< tlie legitimate expression of the astonishiiicMit nf a i.iin .'..iis. imci' '
adequate discussion of thepassa^..
Cornelius a Lapide and Maldonatus are full, but uncriticar.
t The early Christians, however, while believing the Perpetual Virginity as a fact, did not regard it as an article of faith As late as c. a.b. 370, St. Basil could write : 'The worils, IJe knew her not till the brought forth her first-born tan, do indeed afford a certain ground for thinking that Slary, after acting in till