Mary in the Gospel of Mark: Part III: The Question of Perpetual Virginity

Mary in the Gospel of Mark

Two conclusions have surfaced thus far in our study of this important text.

First, by using the out-of-the-ordinary expression “son of Mary”;  Mark is not referring to the virginal conception (cf Part I of this series; Link Here) and second, the naming of brothers and sisters of Jesus cannot be used either to support or deny the perpetual virginity of Mary (cf Part II of this series; Link Here).

Before proceeding to a study of the only other text of Mark which mentions Mary, 3:31-35, there is a critical spin-off question which must be answered; if Mark together with the other Gospels makes no reference to the perpetual virginity of Mary, how can it be proclaimed as an infallible truth of the Christian faith? Can something not found in scripture be a dogma of the Church?

Is There an Explicit Passage to the Perpetual Virginity of Mary?

But is it true that not one of the Gospels refers explicitly or implicitly to the perpetual virginity of Mary? A resounding Yes would be the response of an ever increasing number of contemporary Catholic scripture scholars.

However, as far back as St. Gregory of Nyssa (+394 AD) and practically up to the middle of the 1900s, scholars had this belief; the common opinion of saints and scholars was that the Gospel of Luke does refer to this truth.

Read once again the annunciation narrative (Lk 1:26-38). The angel Gabriel tells Mary; “And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus … and of his kingdom there will be no end”. (1:31-33). Now notice Mary’s questioning; “how can this be since I do not know man”? (verse 34). All are agreed that the phrase “to know man” refers here to marital relations; the text would better be translated; “since I have no relations with a man”. What are the implications of this reply of Our Lady?

Mary Was Legally Married At the Time of the Incarnation

The historical context is essential in order to discover the full meaning of Mary’s words. At the time of the annunciation, she is already legally married to Joseph (“betrothed”). However, according to the prevailing custom, there is a waiting period of about six months to a year between the legal I do and the day when Joseph will carry Mary over the threshold. Mary’s “I do not know man” states clearly that she is not yet living with her husband, Joseph.

However, according to the traditional opinion, that is not the primary intent of “I do not know man”.  Our Lady’s question indicates, so this position affirms, a vow or a firm resolve of remaining always a virgin. Therefore, the scriptures do proclaim the perpetual virginity of Mary. There is no binding teaching of the Church on precisely how to interpret this verse. However,  it is important to examine briefly the foundations of this long-standing view.

Some Believe Luke’s Verse Implies Perpetual Virginity

The is a core reason for upholding that “I do not know man” refers to a vow / resolve of perpetual virginity; it is the fact that otherwise there is no reason for such a phrase on Mary’s lips. The angel Gabriel tells her that “You will conceive …”. Mary is already married and will shortly be living with Joseph her husband;  why would she have to state that she “does not know man”? There is no need for her to proclaim her virginity; that is already understood by the fact that she is “betrothed,” not yet sharing marital relations with her husband. The angel is telling her that – in the near future, when she and Joseph live together – she “will conceive . . . and bear a child.” Her strange reply, “I do not know man” must mean something more than the already stated fact that she is a virgin.

Modern Day Scholars Do Not Interpret The Verse The Same As Older Scholars

Notice also, this opinion insists, that she does not say “I have not had marital relations with a man,” but uses the present tense, “I do not know … ,” implying a permanent state, a resolve, a vow not “to know man.”

Moreover, considering the entire context – the annunciation of the conception of “the Son of the Most High,” who “will reign over the house of Jacob forever and of his kingdom there will be no end” (1:32-33), is it not more than probable that Mary Immaculate would have, at least upon hearing this announcement, made the firm resolve to a life of virginity?

Now a brief examination of some of the contemporary objections to this traditional interpretation. If Mary had made a vow of virginity, why did she enter into marriage with Joseph? The more common response today is that Mary only made the vow of virginity at the time of the annunciation, not before. She legally married Joseph without knowing that she would be chosen to be the Mother of God. Totally dedicated to the service of the Lord, she followed the tradition of her people and entered into an “arranged” marriage with Joseph. It was the announcement that she was to be the Mother of “the Son of the Most High” which inspired in her the vow of virginity for the sake of the kingdom of God inaugurated by her child.

All Catholics Agree that the Perpetual Virginity . . .

To the objection that celibacy was not practiced by the contemporaries of Mary, others respond that there are indications of groups of Jewish people (Essenes) who practiced protracted periods of celibacy. And even if Mary did not know of these groups or shared their views, should we be surprised that Mary Immaculate would have responded to the announcement of the arrival of “the kingdom without end” by a vow of celibacy?

Not out of any motive implying that sexuality was sinful or dangerous – that would not constitute a Christian vow of celibacy – but as a faith response to the inbreaking of the new creation, the reign of Yahweh, in her end through her?

However, modern Catholic authors, while upholding the dogma of the perpetual virginity of Mary, deny that it is found explicitly or implicitly in this text which they would say is at best ambiguous concerning any vow on Our Lady’s part. The primary objection of modern authors to the traditional opinion that “I do not know man” indicates a vow of virginity, is the contemporary understanding of the historicity of the annunciation narrative.

. . . is a Dogma of the Faith, Rooted in the Word of God

Present-day scholarship generally rejects the idea that Luke has written a biographical account of the annunciation of the messiah. Rather than trying to tell us how Mary came to a knowledge of the virginal conception, Luke is teaching the reader how the child was conceived. To do so, he follows the traditional manner by which scripture describes the announcement of a birth. The format includes a question on the part of the person addressed.

When Abraham, for example, hears Yahweh announce the birth of his child, he questions; “Shall a child be born to a man who is a hundred years old? Shall Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child”? (Gen 17:17). The announcement of the birth of John the Baptizer follows the same pattern. Zechariah asks the question: “How shall I know this? For I am an old man and my wife is advanced in years”. (Lk I:18). Since Mary’s inquiry, “How can this be since I do not know man,” is nothing more than a similar literary- prop to advance the dialogue, the question whether or not it implies that Mary decided upon a vow of virginity is, so contemporary scholars declare, irrelevant.

Whether or not Mary’s reply to the angel is indicative of a vow of virginity can, therefore, be legitimately argued. Mighty few Catholic scripture professors today would teach that this text in itself refers to the perpetual virginity of Mary. Nonetheless, all Catholics agree that the perpetual virginity is a dogma of the faith, rooted in the word of God. How this is so will be the topic of the next installment (article).

(To be Continued)