I have recently been doing some more work on Mariology in my spare time, including a number of recent posts on the use of the perfect passive participle form of χαριτοω outside of Luke 1:28 in Greek literature. I have also been checking references to proponents of the perpetual virginity of Mary and other like-things (I have nerdy interests, what can I say?) The following is from a contemporary of Jerome. In his Tractate III on Matthew 1:24-25, Chromatius, bishop pf Aquileia (d. circa 406) wrote:
1. Deinde retulit euangelista : Exsurgens autem Ioseph a
somno [et reliqua usque] et uocauit nomen eius Iesum. Ioseph ergo per angelum
de sacramento mysterii caelestis instruitur, monitis angeli laetus obtemperat,
gaudens diuina iussa prosequitur, suscipit sanctam Mariam et uotis
exsultantibus gloriatur, quia tantae maiestatis uirginem matrem coniugem suam
dici ab angelo meretur audire. Sed de hoc quod dictum est ab euangelista : Et
non cognouit eam donec peperit filium, solent aliquanti homines stulti
quaestionem mouere, existimantes post natiuitatem Domini sanctam Mariam Ioseph
fuisse coniunctam. Sed hoc intellegi nec causa fidei nec ratio ipsa ueritatis
admittit. Absit enim ut post tanti mysterii sacramentum, post dignationis
dominicae natiuitatem Maria uirgo uirum cognouisse credatur, cum in lege
ueteris testamenti illa Maria prophetissa soror Moysi uel Aaron uisis signis
caelestibus post Aegypti plagas, post rubri maris diuisionem, post gloriam
Domini praecedentem et in columna ignis ac nubis aspectam, uiri nescia uirgo
permanserit, ita nec credi fas est ut haec Maria euangelica uirgo Dei capax,
quae Deum gloriae non in nube conspexit, sed portare uirginali utero meruit,
uirum cognouisse credatur. Noe Dei colloquio dignus effectus, abstinentiam sibi
de cetero coniugalis necessitatis indixit. Moyses post auditam Dei uocem de
rubo a consortio coniugali abstinuit et credi fas est ut Ioseph uir iustus
sanctam Mariam post partum dominicae natiuitatis cognouisse credatur?
2. Sed in hoc quod ait : Et non cognouit earn donee peperit
filium, plerumque solet scriptura diuina quasi finem his quae finem non habent
designare, et his quasi certum tempus ascribere quae tempore non cludentur. Sed
de multis uel pauca ponamus. Per Esaiam ad populum Deus ita loquitur : Ego sum
qui sum et quoadusque senescatis ego sum. Cum dicit : Quoadusque senescatis ego
sum, quasi certum tempus sibi uidetur ascribere, sed non ideo temporalis Deus
intellegendus est, qui aeternus est confitendus. Alio quoque loco per eumdem
prophetam Dominus exprobans Iudaeis peccata eorum inter cetera ita loquitur :
Viuo ergo, dicit Dominus, quia non remittetur uobis peccatum hoc quoadusque
moriamini, cum iniqui permanentes in peccatis plus magis post mortem obnoxii
teneantur ad poenam. In psalmo (etiam> dicitur ex persona iustorum : Sicut
oculi ancillae in manibus dominae suae [et reliqua usque] misereatur nobis. Et
hic uidetur tempus definitum cum dicitur : Quoadusque misereatur nobis, cum multo
magis post misericordiam consecutam intentos esse ad Deum iustorum oculos nouerimus.
In euangelio quoque ipse Dominus ad discipulos suos ita loquitur : Et ego
uobiscum sum omnibus diebus usque ad consummationem saeculi. Et in hoc dicto
tempus uidetur ascribere quasi usque ad consummationem saeculi cum discipulis
futurum se Dominus repromittat, cum non dubium sit post finem saeculi multo
magis cum discipulis suis Dominum futurum cum immortalitate donata secundum
apostoli dictum, iam non per speculum et in aenigmate, sed facie ad faciem
Dominus sit uidendus, et multa alia innumerabilia secundum haec si requiras
inuenies. Cum ergo dicitur in praesenti loco non cognouit eam donec peperit
filium, per parui temporis significationem omne tempus significatum debes
aduertere. (Corpus Christianorum [Series Latina; Turnhout: Brepols,
1974], 9A:208-9)
English translation of the
above:
1. Then the evangelist relates: “But
Joseph, having arisen from sleep [and the remainder follows], called his name
Jesus.” Therefore, Joseph is instructed by the angel regarding the sacrament of
the heavenly mystery; rejoicing in the angel’s admonitions, he obediently
complies, joyfully pursuing the divine commands. He receives the holy Mary and,
with exultant vows, exalts himself in glory—having merited to hear from the
angel that he is to be called the husband of a virgin mother of such high
majesty.
But concerning what
the evangelist states—“And he did not know her until she had borne a son”—some
foolish men customarily raise the question, supposing that after the birth of
the Lord the holy Mary was united with Joseph. Yet this interpretation is admitted
neither by the demands of faith nor by the very reason of truth. For it is
unthinkable that, after the sacrament of such a great mystery, after the divine
birth of Mary the Virgin, it is believed that she came to know a man, since in
the law of the Old Testament that Mary the prophetess, whether regarded as the
sister of Moses or Aaron, having witnessed the heavenly signs following the
regions of Egypt, after the parting of the Red Sea, after the preceding glory
of the Lord and the appearance in the column of fire and cloud, remained a
virgin unacquainted with man—so it is not proper to believe that this
evangelical Mary, the virgin capable of bearing God—who did not behold God in
glory in a cloud but merited to bear Him in her virginal womb—is thought to
have known a man.
Noah, deemed worthy
of conversation with God, thereafter proclaimed for himself abstinence from
conjugal necessity. Moses, after hearing the voice of God from the burning
bush, likewise abstained from marital union; and is it proper to believe that
Joseph, a just man, came to know the holy Mary after the birth of the Lord?
2. But regarding that which is stated, “And
he did not know her until she had borne a son,” divine Scripture usually tends
to designate as an end things that, in truth, have no end, and to attribute to
them a definite time which they do not meet. Yet let us consider many—or a
few—cases. Through Isaiah God speaks to the people thus: “I am that I am, and
as long as you are old, I am.” When he says, “as long as you are old, I am,” it
appears as if he is assigning himself a definite time; yet this is not to be taken
as meaning that God is temporal, for He is to be confessed as eternal. In
another passage, through the same prophet, the Lord—condemning the sins of the
Jews among other things—speaks thus: “I live,” says the Lord, “because this sin
will not be forgiven you as long as you are mortal, since the wicked,
persisting in their sins, are held even more liable to punishment after death.”
In the psalm (also rendered from the perspective of the righteous): “Like the
eyes of a handmaid in the hands of her mistress [and the remainder until] she
has mercy on us.” And here a definite time seems to be assigned when it is
said, “as long as she has mercy on us,” since we have come to understand that
the eyes of the righteous are even more fixed on God after mercy has been
obtained. And in the Gospel the Lord Himself speaks to His disciples thus: “And
I am with you all days until the consummation of the age.” In this statement a
time is ascribed—as if until the consummation of the age—when the Lord promises
Himself to be with His disciples; for there is no doubt that after the end of
the age the Lord, together with His disciples, will be present with the
immortality granted (as the Apostle declares), no longer seen only by a
reflection or in a riddle, but face to face—and many other innumerable things
along these lines, if you inquire, you will find. Therefore, since in the
present passage it is said, “he did not know her until she had borne a son,”
you must construe every indicated time as having the signification of a brief
period.
To Support this Blog:
Email for Amazon Gift
card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com
Email for Logos.com Gift
Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com
