Today I
listened to Trent Horn’s “Counsel of Trent” episode where he attempts to defend
the perpetual virginity of Mary (link).
Trent, in the podcast episode, stated that he comes more down on the Epiphanian
view as opposed to the Hieronymian view of the brothers/sisters of Jesus (i.e.,
that they were adopted brothers/sisters of Jesus from a previous marriage of
Jesus as opposed to being near-relatives, such as cousins).
The problem
is that the tradition (note: lower-case t;
I am not claiming it is a dogma)
concerning Joseph favours, not just the Hieronymian view (or some related view,
such as that of John McHugh in his The
Mother of Jesus in the New Testament [1975]), but that Joseph himself was a
virgin when he married Mary.
Pope Leo XIII, in his encyclical Quamquam
Pluries, mandated devotion to St. Joseph on the basis of his
worthy, virginal state:
In
truth, the dignity of the Mother of God is so lofty that naught created can
rank above it. But as Joseph has been united to the Blessed Virgin by the ties
of marriage, it may not be doubted that he approached nearer than any
[by means of his chastity] to the eminent dignity by which the Mother of God
surpasses so nobly all created natures. For marriage is the most intimate
of all unions which from its essence imparts a community of gifts between those
that by it are joined together. Thus in giving Joseph the Blessed Virgin
as spouse, God appointed him to be not only her life's companion, the witness
of her maidenhood, the protector of her honour, but also, by virtue of
the conjugal tie, a participator in her sublime dignity.
Fathers
of families find in Joseph the best personification of paternal solicitude and
vigilance; spouses a perfect example of love, of peace, and of conjugal
fidelity; virgins at the same time find in him the model and
protector of virginal integrity.
Other important theological figures in the Catholic
tradition who stated the same thing include the following who are all canonized
saints (I mention this, not to impute to them infallibility on the following,
but to show that this is the predominant position in Catholicism):
Peter Damian (1007-1072): "If it does not suffice
for you that not only the mother is a virgin, there remains the belief
of the Church that he who served as the father is also a virgin"
(Filas, 99).
Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) used no uncertain terms is
decrying the Epiphanian view as "false; for if the Lord did not wish his
virgin mother to be entrusted to the care of anyone but a virgin [John], how
could he have suffered that her spouse was not a virgin, and as such would have
persisted?" (Ad Galatas, 1.19).
Notice also the following from commentators on Joseph
and devotion thereto:
As Fr Paul K. Raftery, O.P. wrote:
Both St. Peter Damian’s statement and St. Thomas’ insistence on
the falsehood of the apocryphal legend show how fully St.
Joseph’s virginity has been accepted into Church teaching. ("Theology for
the Laity," The Rosary Light & Life, 54/4, 2001
Pope John Paul II assumes Joseph's virginity in
his Redemptoris
Custos, in which he states:
The Savior began the work of salvation by this virginal and holy union, wherein is
manifested his all-powerful will to purify and sanctify the family - that
sanctuary of love and cradle of life."
If Joseph had other children from a previous marriage,
his bond with Mary could certainly be called "celibate" (or “chaste”)
but just as certainly not "virginal."
While the Epiphanian view is allowable in Roman Catholicism, the
position has been rejected by many Catholic theologians and modern defenders of
Catholic Mariology, and this can be seen how in Catholic devotion to Joseph
assumes his being a virgin when he
married Mary, not that he remained a chaste spouse with Mary merely.
For those interested, the best book defending the Epiphanian view of the
brothers/sisters of Jesus is that of Eastern Orthodox priest and scholar, Laurent
Cleenewerck’s book:
For a discussion of the perpetual virginity of Mary, see Chapter 4: The
Perpetual Virginity of Mary, pp. 83-138 of my book, Behold the Mother of My Lord: Towards a Mormon Mariology (2017). I
have put the PDF of the book up on my Google Sites website for free here.
I will note that I have told Trent Horn I would happily engage with him
in a debate (or plural debates). I
would happy debate Trent (or any Catholic apologist) on the Perpetual Virginity
(or Immaculate Conception) (and yes, I would happily defend LDS theology, too,
such as divine embodiment, plurality of gods, etc;) I know my friend Kwaku El has said he is open to debating Trent (as well as Patrick Madrid), and so am I (and I say this as the LDS apologist, next perhaps only to Blake Ostler on certain topics, who is the most well-read in Catholic theology and probably the most well-read in modern Catholic apologetics).
