September 13, 2010 – Catechism 496-501

Born of a virgin. I am guessing that all Christians believe this to be true of Mary. Jesus came without the seed of man but by the power of the Holy Spirit so that we would know He truly was God. All Christians believe this even though, as the Catechism states, it is “a divine work that surpasses all human understanding and possibility”. So, the idea of the virginity of Mary was not only not accepted by some pagans and Jews, but mocked and seen as incomprehensible. It was not something that was put in the Christian belief to make it easier for converts to believe and convert. It is something difficult to understand and can only be accepted through faith. I guess I find it difficult to understand why the Jews found it so hard to believe when their prophets foretold that it would happened.

Mary, Ever-Virgin. This is one that many do not agree with. I guess I never read about the Church’s teaching about Mary’s “virginal integrity” even during Jesus’ birth. That would explain the idea or thought that Mary did not experience child bearing pains that other women would. That idea is also one of the connections to her sinlessness because woman were told they would experience pain in child birth because of sin.

Paragraph 500 spells out very clearly the Church’s argument against the idea of Mary having other children. Brothers and Sisters do not always mean that people share parents. Even today people call each other brother or sister when they may not be any relation at all. The paragraph footnote points to Genesis examples, so I thought I would go over those to clarify.

Gen 13:8 So Abram said to Lot, "Let's not have any quarreling between you and me, or between your herdsmen and mine, for we are brothers.; - They are not brothers. Lot is the son of Haran, Haran the son of Terah. Abraham was the son of Terah. So, Abraham was Lot’s uncle, not brother.

Gen 14:16 And he brought back all the goods, and also brought again his brother Lot, and his goods, and the women also, and the people.; Speaking about Abraham bringing back things after defeating the kings that captured Lot.

Gen 29:15; And Laban said unto Jacob, Because thou art my brother, shouldest thou therefore serve me for nought? tell me, what shall thy wages be? Laban was son of Bethel, Bethel the son of Nahor, Nahor was the son of Terah. Jacob was son of Issac, Issac the son of Abraham, Abraham was the son of Terah. So, these two shared a great grandfather, but they were 3rd cousins or 2nd cousins once removed. Not brothers.

And in case you may be thinking it is something the translation, the last two scripture quotes are from the King James Version and the first is the NIV. So, the fact that the Bible says Jesus has brothers is not a air tight argument against the Catholic Church’s teaching that He did not. It could have meant His relation, as the term brother is used in other places in the Bible.

If you still choose to believe that Jesus had brothers or sisters and that they were Mary's children, explain to me your explainations for these two Scriptures.

Luke 2:41-49. Jesus is 12 years old and went down with His family. There is no mention of brothers or sisters here.

John 19:25-27. If Jesus had brothers or sisters, why would He give the responsiblity of His mother to John. That would have been an incredible insult to his siblings. You might think that all of His brothers or sisters had already passed, but Jesus' brothers are mentioned being around at Pentacost. It makes no sense to give Mary to John if she had other children still living.