§ 81. THE WORSHIP OF MARY. MARIOLOGY. 415
calls her also the " advocate of the virgin Eve," which, at a later daj, is understood in the sense of intercessor.' On this account this father stands as the oldest leading authority in the Catholic Mariology ; though with only partial justice ; for he was still widely removed from the notion of the sinlessness of Mary, and expressly declares the answer of Christ in John ii, 4, to be a reproof of her premature haste/ In the same way Tertullian, Origen, Basil the Great, and even Chrysostoni, with all their high estimate of the mother of our Lord, ascribe
virgo. Qiiemadmodimi ilia virmn quideni liabeng Adam, virgo tamen adliuc existens. . . iuobediens facta, etsibi etuniverso generi hiimano causafactaestmortis : sic et Maria habens praedestinatum virum, et tamen virgo obediens, et sibi ei imicerso generiliurnano causa facta est salutis. . . . Sic autemetEvaeinobedientiae nodus sohitionem accepit per obedientiam Mari;e. Quod enim alligavit virgo Eva per incredulitatem, lioc virgo Maria solvit per iidem.." Comp.v. 19, § 1. Similar statements occur in Justin M.(Dial. c. Tryph. 100), Tertullian (De carneChristi, c. 17), Epiphanius(Haer.78, 18), Eplirsem (0pp. ii. 318; iii. 607), Jerome (Ep. xxii. ad Eustoch.21: "MorsperEvam, vita per Mariam''). Even St. Augustine carries this parallel between the first and second Eve as far as any of the fathers, in a sermon De Adam et Eva et sancta Maria, not heretofore quoted, published from VaticanManuscrlpts in AngeloMai'sNovaPatrum Bibliotheca, torn. i. Rom. 1852, pp. 1-4. Here, after a most exaggerated invective against woman (whom he calls latrocinium vitae, suavis mors,blandapercussio, interfectio lenis, pernicies delicata, malum libens, sapida jugulalio, omnii:m calamitas rerum — and all that in a sermon!), goes on thus to draw a contrast between Eve and Mary: "O mulier ista exsecranda,damdecepit! oiterumbeatacolenda, dumsalvat! Plusenimcontulit gratiae, quam doloris. Licet ipsa docuerit mortem, ipsa tamen genuit dominum salvatorem. Inventaest ergo mors per mulierem, vita per virginem. . . . Ergo malum per feminam, immo et per f eminam bonum: quia si per Evam cecidimus, magisstamus per Mariam: per Evam sumus servituti addicti, effeti per Mariam liberi: Eva nobis sustulit diuturnitatem, aeternitatem nobis Maria condonavit : Eva nos damnari fecit per arboris pomum, absolvit Maria per arboris sacramentum, quia et Christus in ligno pependit ut fructus" (c. 3, pp. 2 and 3). And in conclusion: " Haec mater est liumani generis, auctor ilia sahitis. Eva nos edncavit, roboravit et Maria : per Evam cotidie crescimus, regnamus in seternum per Mariam: per Evam deduct! ad terram, ad coelum elevati per Mariam" (c. 4, p. 4). Comp. Aug. Sermo 232, c. 2.
' Adv. haer. v. cap. 19, § 1 : " Quemadmodum ilia [Eva] seducta est ut effugeret Deum ... sic hsec [Maria] suasa est obedire Deo, uii rirginis Ecce virgo Maria fieret adwcata [probably a translation of crvvnyopos or irapdK\7]T0sJ. Et quemadmodum adstrictumestmorti genus humanum per virginem, w/ZraflwperwV^tnew, 3equalancedisposita,virginalisinobedientiaper virginalem obedientiam." p415
'■^ Adv. haer. iii. cap. 16, § 7 (not. c. 18, as Gieseler, i. 2, p. 277, wrongly cited it): ". . . TJominus repellns fjns in tempest iram festinatione7u, di-is.it: ^ Quid mihi et tibi est mulier ? ' " So even Ohrysostom, Hom. 21 in Joh. n. 1.
416 THIKD PERIOD. A.D. 311-590.
to her on one or two occasions (John ii. 3 ; Matt. xiii. iT) maternal vanity, also doubt and anxiety, and make this the sword (Luke ii. 35) which, under the cross, passed through her soul.' In addition to this typological antithesis of Mary and Eve, the rise of monasticism supplied the development of Mariology a further motive in the enhanced estimate of virginity, without which no true holiness could be conceived. Hence the virginity of Mary, whicli is unquestioned for the part of her life before the birth of Christ, came to be extended to her whole life, and her marriage with the aged Joseph to be regarded as a mere protectorate, and, therefore, only a nominal marriage. The passage, Matt. i. 25, which, according to its obvious literal meaning (the etu? and tt p w r 6 T0/C09 ^), seems to favor the opposite view, was overlooked or otherwise exj^lained ; and the brothers of Jesus,'' who appear fourteen or fifteen times in the gospel history and always in close connection with His mother were regarded not as sous of Mary subsequently born, but either as sons of Joseph by a former marriage (the view of p]piphanius), or, agreeably to the wider Hebrew use of the term nx, as cousnis of Jesus (Jerome).* It was felt — and this feeling is shai-ed by many devout Protestants — to be irreconcilable with her dignity and the dignity of Christ, that ordinary c^hildren sliould afterward proceed from the same womb out of which the Saviour of the world was born. The u&me perjpetua vlrgo^ ae\ irapSevo'i, was thenceforth a peculiar and inalienable
' TertuUiiin, De came Christi, c. 7; Origen, in Luc. Horn. 17; Ba.sil, Ep. 2ftO; Clirysostom, Horn. 44 in Matt, aud Horn. 21 in Job.; Cyril Alex, In Joann. L xiL
' The reading ■kpu)t6tukus in Matt. i. 25 is somewliat doubtful, but it is certainly genuine in Luke ii, 7.
' They are always called a.5f\<poi (four in number, James, Joseph or Joses, Simon, and Jude) and aoe\<pai (at least two), Matt. xil. 46, 47 ; xiii. 55, 56 ; Mark iii. 31, 32; vi. 3; John vii. 3, 5, 10; Acts i. 14, etc., but nowhere dce>J/ioi, cousins, a term well known to the N. T. vocabulary (Col. iv. 10), or ffuy-YfyeTs, kbumien (Mark vi. 4; Luke i. 36, 58 ; ii. 44 ; John xviii. 26 ; Acts x. 24), or vl>\ xf;? aStAc^fji, mter's sons (Acts xxiii. 26). This speaks strongly against the cousin-theory.
* Comp. on this whole complicated (lucstion of the brothers of Christ and the connected question of James, the author's treatise on Jakobus and die Briider dea Herm, Berlin, 1842, his Hist, of the Apostolic Church, 2d ed. § 95 (p. 383 of the Leipzig cd. ; p. 378 of the English), and his article on the Brethren of Christ in th« Bibliothcca Sacra of Andover for Oct. 1864.