« ZurückWeiter »
is impossible it should be fulfilled, they plainly shew, that for any knowledge which they had, it was not fulfilled till our Saviour came : and therefore they cannot with any reason deny but that is belonged unto the Messias, as divers of the ancient Rabbins thought and confessed: and is yet more evident by their monstrous error, who therefore expected no Messias in Israel, * because they thought whatsoever was spoken of him to have been completed in Hezekiah. Which is abundantly enough for our present purpose, being only to prove that the Messias promised by God, and expected by the people of God before and under the Law, was to be conceived and born of a virgin.
Secondly, As we are taught by the predictions of the prophets, that a virgin was to be mother of the promised Messias; so are we assured by the infallible relations of the evangeli-ts, that this Mary the mother of Jesus, whom we believe to be Christ, was a virgin when she bare him, when she“ brought forth her first-born son.” That she was a virgin when and after she was espoused unto Joseph, appeareth by the narration of St. Luke (i. 27.); " for the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph.” After the salutation of that angel, that she was still so, appeareth by her question, “ How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?” That she continued so after she conceived by the Holy Ghost, is evident from the relation of St. Matthew : for when she was “ espoused unto Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost." (Matt. i. 18.) That she was a virgin not only while she was with child, but even when she had brought forth, is also evident out of his application of the prophecy: “Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son.” (Matt. i. 23.) For by the same prediction it is as manifest that a virgin should bring forth, as conceive a son. Neither was her act of par
There is no לישראל שכבר אכלוהו בימי חזקיהו
It is the known saying of Hillel, record he inferred, that the Israelites were not ed in Sanhedrin, c. Chelek, nun 75 78 to expect a Messias after Hezekiah :
which conclusion was also false. Messias to the Israelites, because they have 1. Hæc est virgo quæ in utero con ulready enjoyed him in the days of Hezekiah. cepit, virgoque peperit filium. Sic enim Divers of the latter Rabbins endeavour to scriptum est, Ecce virgo in utero concipiet, mollify these words of Hillel by their et pariet Filium. Non enim concepturam several expositions, but in vain. And R. tantummodo Virginem, sed et parituram Joseph understood him better, who thought Virginem dixit. S. Ambros. Epist. 7. ad he took away all expectation of a Mes Siricium. So he argued from the prosias, and therefore fairly prayed for him, phecy, and St. Augustin from the Creed: Condonet Dominus hoc R. Hillel. Howso Si vel per nascentem corrumperetur ejus ever, it appears that from two principles, integritas, non jam ille de Virgine nascewhereof one was false, be gathered that retur; eumque falso, quod absit, de virfalse conclusion. For first, he thought gine natum tota confiteretur Ecclesia, those words in Isaiah were spoken of the quæ, imitans ejus matrem, quotidie parit Messias : which proposition was true. membra, et Virgo est.' Enchir. c. 34. As Secondly, he conceived that those were also St. Ambrose in the same epistle : spoken of Hezekiah, and fulfilled in him : Quæ potuit Virgo concipere, potuit Virgo which proposition was false. From hence' generare, quum semper conceptus præce
BORN OF THE VIRGIN MARY.
turition more contradictory to virginity, than that former of conception.
Thirdly, We believe the mother of our Lord to have been not only before and after his nativity, but also for ever, the most immaculate and blessed Virgin. For although it may be thought sufficient as to the mystery of the incarnation, that when our Saviour was conceived and born, his mother was a virgin; though whatsoever should have followed after, could have no reflective operation upon the first-fruit of her womb; though there be no farther mention in the Creed, than that he was born of the Virgin Mary: yet the peculiar eminency and unparalleled privilege of that mother, the special honour and reverence due unto that Son, and ever paid by her, the regard of that Holy Ghost who came upon her, and the power of the Highest who overshadowed her, the singular goodness and piety of Joseph, to whom she was espoused, have persuaded the Church of God in all ages to believe that she still continued in the same virginity, and therefore is to be acknowledged the Ever-Virgin Mary. As if the gate of the sanctuary in the prophet Ezekiel were to be understood of her : "This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall enter in by it; because the Lord, the God of Israel, hath entered in by it, therefore it shall be shut.” (Ezek. xliv. 2.)
Many, indeed, have taken the boldness to deny this truth, because not recorded in the sacred writ;f and not only so dat, partus sequatur. Sed si doctrinis might bave done it. Apollinaris, or at son creditur sacerdotum, credatur ora least his followers, delivered the same, culis Christi, credatur monitis Angelorum, says Epiphanius, and Eunomius with his, credatur Symbolo Apostolorum, quod Ec τον Ιωσήφ μετά την άφραστον κυοφορίαν συνclesia Romana intemeratum semper cu άπτειν ου πεφρίκασι τη παρθένω, as Photius stodit et servat.' And St. Basil upon oc out of Philostorgius. Not that these casion of the same prophecy: 'H LÚTù words in Photius were the words of Phi. yun nai mapséveç xal pútnp, xai iv to dy lostorgius, for he was clearly an Euno. ασμα της παρθενίας μένουσα, και την της τε-, τnian, and therefore would never express κνογονίας ευλογίαν κληρονομούσα. Ηomil. in their opinions with an oύ πεφρίκασι. And Sanct. Christ. Gen. 6. 4. Virgo peperit, as he always commended Eunomius, so quia Virgo concepit.' Vigil. de unitate he was not commended but by an EunoTrinit. c. 10.
mian, that is, a man of his own sect. As Μέχρι γας της κατά την οικονομίαν υπη
that epigram, ρεσίας αναγκαία η παρθενία, το δ' εφεξής απο
'Eurojacavo. λυπραγμόνητον τύ λόγω του μυστηρίου κατα “Ιστορίην ετέλεσσα Θεού χαρίτισσι σοφήσι. Asítmpgy. S. Basil. Homil. in Sanct. Christ. Which I therefore mention, because GoGen. 6. 5.
tofred bath made an unnecessary emenda+ For so the Greek Church always tion in the verse, itinero 19iou, and a called her αειπάρθενος, and from therm the worse interpretation in the inscription, Latins, Semper Virgo.
taking the Eunomian to be a Catholic, + First we read in the time of Origen, and the name of the sect for the pame of that some did maintain the virginity of a man; and confirming
this error by a Mary no longer than to Christ's nativity. greater mistake, saying Eunomianus was • In tantam nescio quis prorupit insaniam, the name of a man, twice spoken of in ut assereret negatam fuisse Mariam a Suidas, once in Eiroulavòs and again in Salvatore, eo quod post nativitatem illius hours. It is true indeed Suidas saith exjuncta fuerit Josepho.' Homil. 7. in Lu- pressly, Europiavès, öropa xuplov, and imme. cam. Tertullian himself was produced as diately adds these words, tdy Sè Eivoulavor an assertor of the same opinion; nor does έλουσε Βελισάριος το θείον λουτρών, as if BeSt. Jerome deny it, though I think he lisarius had baptized one whose name
on st. Epiphan z og referer the heresy of the collgrisiausilis 2,2, 44.
but to assert the contrary as delivered in the Scriptures, but with no success. For though, as they object, St. Matthew testifieth that Joseph “knew not Mary, until she had brought forth her first-born son,” (Matt. i. 25.) from whence they would infer, that afterwards he knew her; yet the manner of the Scripture language produceth no such inference.* When God said to Jacob, "I will not leave thee until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of,” (Gen. xxviii. 15.) it followeth not that when that was done, the God of Jacob left him. When the conclusion of Deuteronomy was written, it was said of Moses, “ No man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day ;” (Deut. xxxiv. 6.) but it were a weak argument to
was Eunomianus. But the words are force. Το έως ου πάντως αντιδιαιρείται τα
--Και ώμοσα καρτερόν ξεκον, gustin delivereth his opinion otherwise : Virginitatem Mariæ destruebat, dicens
Μη μέν πρίν Οδυσήα μετά Τρώεσσ' αναφήναι, eam pariendo fuisse corruptam. Heres. Πρίν γε τον ές ντάς τε θοάς κλισίας τ' άφι
Od. A. F. 253. 82. And Bonosus, a bishop in Macedonia, referred by the Council of Capua to And yet it is not likely (says Eustathius), the judgment of Anysius bishop of Thes that Helena did ever discover Ulysses to salonica, was condemned for the same, as the Trojans after he was returned : 'Er de appeareth by the 79th Ep. of St. Ambrose, T, Mppiv 'odussña Twoir dvapiai, sed written to Theophilus and Anysius : “ Sane αυτόν εις νήας ικέσθαι, είπερ μη δοκεϊ πιθανόν non possumus negare de Mariæ filiis jure και ευλύγιστον το αναφήναι όλας τον Οδυσσέα reprehensum, meritoque vestram Sanctita. τοϊς Τρωσιν, ενθυμητέον την δύναμιν του, μη tem abhorruisse, quod ex eodem utero vir πρίν ποιήσαι τόδε τι πριν αν τόδε γένηται, ginali, ex quo secundum carnem Christus (ήτις εν τη Α ραψωδία της Ιλιάδος κείται) και natus est, alius partus effusus sit.' This Pareita. ÉXETJEV, ás eix eixo; thy'exémy eitt is the catalogue of those by the ancients τοϊς Ιλιεύσει περί του Οδυσσέως ουδε δτε εις accounted heretics, for denying the per νήας και κλισίας αφίκετο αυτός. A negation petual virginity of the mother of our Lord. anteceding #py or 25, is nc affirmation
* For in the word 'Ews there is no such following them.
infer from thence, that the sepulchre of Moses hath been known ever since. When Samuel had delivered a severe prediction unto Saul, he “came no more to see him until the day of his death;” (1 Sam. xv. 35.) but it were a strange collection to infer, that he therefore gave him a visit after he was dead. "Michal the daughter of Saul had no child until the day of her death ;” (2 Sam. vi. 23.) and yet it were a ridiculous stupidity to dream of any midwifery in the grave. Christ promised his presence to the apostles "unto the end of the world :" (Matt. xxviii. 20.) who ever made so unhappy a construction as to infer from thence, that for ever after he would be absent from them?
Again, it is true that Christ is termed the first-born son of Mary,* from whence they infer she must needs have a second; but might as well conclude, that wheresoever there is one, there must be two. For in this particular the Scripture-notion of priority excludeth an antecedent, but inferreth not a consequent: it supposeth none to have gone before, but concludeth not any to follow after. “ Sanctify unto me (saith God) all the first-born;" which was a firm and fixed law, immediately obliging upon the birth : whereas if the first-born had included a relation to a second, there could have been no present certainty, but a suspension of obedience; nor had the first-horn been sanctified of itself, but the second birth had sanctified the first. And well might any sacrilegious Jew have kept back the price of redemption due unto the priest,t nor could it have been required of him, till a second offspring had appeared; and so no redemption at all had been required for an only son. Whereas all such pretences were unheard of in the Law, because the original Hebrew wordt is not capable of any such construction; and in the Law itself it carrieth with it a clear interpretation, “Sanctify unto me all the first-born : whatsoever openeth the womb among the children of Israel, both of man and beast, it is mine.” (Exod. xiii. 2.) The apertion of the womb determineth the first-born ;s and the law of
For 1 shall not deny that Christ was called the first-born in respect of his mother, though Epiphanius thought that a εufficient answer : Ούκ είπεν, ότι έγέννησι τον πρωτότοκος αυτής· αλλ' ουκ έγνω αυτήν, , έως έγέννησε τον υιόν αυτής, και ουκ είπε, τον πρωτότοκος αυτής, αλλά τον πρωτότοκον. 'Επ μεν γάρ τώ υιώ αυτής εσήμανεν, εξ αυτής κατά σάρκα γεγεννήσθαι» επί δε τη του πρωτοτόκου επωνυμία ουκέτι το αυτής έθετο, αλλά πρωτόTixo uiror. Hæres. 78. $. 17. As if her son the first-born were not her first-born son. Ου πάντως και πρωτότοκος προς τους επιγινομένους έχει την σύγκρισιν, άλλ' ο πρώτον διανοίγων μήτραν Πρωτότοκος ονομάζεται. , S. Basil. Hom, in Sanct. Christ. Gen. $. 5. • Primogenitus est non tantum post quem
et alii, sed ante quem nullus.' S. Hieron. adv. Helvid. col. 443. It is observed by Servius, on that of Virgil's Æneid. i. 5. • Trojæ qui primus ab oris,' that primus is post quem nullus.
+ Thus Jerome makes his plea : Quid me in unius mensis stringis articulo? quid primogenitum vocas, quem an sequantur fratres ignoro? Exspecta donec nascatur secundus : nihil debeo sacerdoti, nisi et ille fuerit procreatus, per quem is qui ante natus est incipiat esse primogenitus. Advers. Helvid. col. 443. $
Definivit sermo Dei, quid sit Primogenitum ; Omne, inquit, quod nperit vuda vam.' S. Hier, adv. Helv. col. 443.
margin of fr. 263
redemption excludeth all such tergiversation : “ Those that are redeemed, from a month old thou shalt redeem;" (Numb. xviii. 16.) no staying to make up the relation, no expecting another birth to perfect the redemption. Being then “ they brought our Saviour to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord; as it is written in the Law of the Lord, Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord" (Luke ii. 22, 23.) it is evident he was called the first-born of Mary according to the notion of the Law of Moses, and consequently that title inferreth no succession, nor proveth the mother to have any other offspring:
Indeed, as they thirdly object, it cannot be denied but that we read expressly in the Scriptures of the brethren of our Lord: “ He went down to Capernaum, he, and his mother, and his brethren,” (John ii. 12.) and, “While he talked unto the people, his mother and his brethren stood withont, desiring to speak with him.” (Matt, xii. 46.) But although his mother and his brethren be named together, yet they are never called the sons of his mother; and the question is not whether Christ had any brethren, but whether his mother brought forth any other children? It is possible Joseph might have children before Mary was espoused to him ; and then as he was reputed and called our Saviour's father, so might they well be accounted and called his brethren, as the ancient fathers,* especially of the Greek Church, have taught. Nor need we thus assert that Joseph had any offspring, because the language of the Jews includeth in the name of brethren not only the strict relation of
* Origen first delivereth it on St. Matt. lact, Ecumenius, and Nicephorus. These and Eusebius sbeweth his opinion, speak all seem to have followed an old tradiing of St. James the brother of our Lord, tion, which is partly still continued, in Hist. Eccl. I. ii. c. 1. Tórs drita xal 'láxe Epiphanius : "Erxe de otros é 'lucho Thy uè βον τον του Κυρίου λεγόμενον αδελφόν, ότι δη πρώτην αυτου γυναίκα έκ της φυλής Ιούδα: και ούτος 'Ιωσήφ ανόμαστο παίς, του δε και κυΐσκει αυτα αύτη παϊδας τον αριθμόν έξ, Xplotou Tatę 'Iwono. So we read, as it τέσσαρας μέν άρρενας, θηλείας δε δύο. Heres, is set forth by R. Stephan. But in my 78. $. 7. The first of these six children book collated with an ancient MS. "Ort was James : μετ' αυτόν δε γίνεται παΐς 'Ιασή δε και ούτος υιός ήν του Ιωσήφ του νομιζομένου καλούμενος, είτα μετ' αυτον Συμεών, έπειτα οιονεί πατρός του Χριστού. Which is much Ιούδας και δύο θυγατέρες, η Μαρία, και η Σαmore plain; for krónaoto waiç is nothing Adun xalouév. Ibid. §. 8. Thus had the $0 pertinent in this particular, as viàs ny. Greeks a distinct relation of the sons and So Epiphanius : 'Hy yag o 'láxxßos outog vids daughters of Joseph, and of the order of του Ιωσήφ εκ γυναικός του Ιωσήφ, ουκ από their generation. Whose authority I shall Magias. Hæres. 29. $. 4. And Hæres. 42. conclude with that of Jobius (Econ. 1. ix. $. 12. speaking of the rest he calls them : "Εδει πατέρα και αδελφούς επί γης ονομάσαι τους υιούς Ιωσήφ εκ της όντως αυτού άλλης τον απάτορα, ουκ έκ τών ληστών και πονηρών yuvasxác. Thus St. Hilary: • Homines τούτους εξελέξατο, αλλά τους εν δικαιοσύνη pravissimi binc præsumunt opinionis suæ διαλάμποντας τοιούτος γαρ 'σήφ, και οι τούauctoritatem, quod plures Dominum no TOU Taides. In Phot. Biblioth. 999. C. $8. strum fratres habuisse sit traditum, quasi col. 642. And that of Amphilochius Mariæ illi fuissent, et non potius Joseph Jun. 'Ηπίστησαν δέ ποτε και α το ''σήφ ex priore conjugio sascepti.' Com. in Matt. υλο, καθώς μαρτυρεί ο Ευαγγελιστής, c. i. Thus also St. Ambrose de Virg. πειρα διδαχθέντες το αληθές, γέγρας κασιν And generally all the fathers to that time, Ιάχαίος και Ιούδας παντί τω κοσμια, ού και and it e Greeks afterwards. St. Chry Κυρίου: Χριστού δούλους εαυτούς είναι. Suslom, St. Cyril, Euthymius, Theopby Urat, in Deip. in fin.