Whenever I discuss Mariology, particularly
Roman Catholic Mariology, many tend to have a “you are kidding me?” look on
their faces whenever I discuss the Catholic dogma about her perpetual
virginity. Many are familiar with sexual virginity, that is, Mary
remained a virgin in that she never had sexual relations. However, many are
unaware that this aspect of the dogma is secondary. What has primacy in the
Catholic definition is physical virginity, that is, Mary’s physical virginity
(her hymen) remained intact even during the birthing process. I discussed such
issues in chapter 4, "The Perpetual Virginity of Mary," pp. 83-138 of
my book Behold
the Mother of My Lord: Towards a Mormon Mariology.
As many find it hard to believe that Rome
actually teaches such, note the following two helpful discussions from Roman Catholic
sources defending this aspect of the perpetual virginity. The first comes from
the “Rules for Retrogrades” channel:
R4R: Was Mary Really Ever
Virgin? Apologetics with Dr. William Mahoney on Mary's Birthday!
The second comes from Thomas Weinandy, a
Catholic priest and member of the Vatican’s International Theological Commission:
There
arises the question of Mary’s virginity. The theological tradition maintains
that Mary was a virgin before, during, and after giving bith to Jesus.
It also argues that Mary conceived without stain and gave birth without pain.
Would not painful natural childbirth jeopardize Mary’s virginity? . . .
First, if Jesus, as the New Adam, assumed a humanity of the sinful race of the
first Adam and thereby experienced the effects of that fallen humanity—such as
pain, suffering, and death—is it not proper that Mary, herself being of the
sinful race of Adam, equally experience pain, suffering, and death? Second, if
Jesus, in assuming a humanity from disobedient Adam, overcame such disobedience
through his own obedience, even unto death on the cross, and so became the New
Adam of a new human race, should not Mary, through her obedience, overcome
the sin and curse of Eve—painful childbirth—thus becoming the New Eve? The
ultimate issue is this: if Jesus was not immune from the effects of Adam’s sin
in becoming man, then Mary, from whom he received his humanity, out not be
immune from the effects of Eve’s sin.
As to the
maintaining of Mary’s virginity while naturally giving birth to Jesus, the
premiere title for Mary is that she is the Mother of God. She is a virgin
mother in that she conceived her son by the Holy Spirit. The tradition
argued for a miraculous birth in order to maintain Mary’s virginity. I
argue that it was not the birth that was miraculous, for such a miracle
jeopardizes the Incarnation and so Mary being Mother of God, but that, if such
is necessary, then the preservation of Mary’s virginity was miraculous .
. . Mary’s virginity is the servant of her motherhood. Her virginity denotes
that she conceived her son not by way of human causality but by way of the Holy
Spirit. Her virginity defines the nature of her motherhood, and not that her
motherhood defines the nature of her virginity. She is not a mother virgin. She
is a virgin mother. (Thomas G. Weinandy, Jesus Becoming Jesus: A Theological
Interpretation of the Synoptic Gospels [Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University
of America Press, 2018], 36-37 n. 3, emphasis added)