Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

Beside this name of the blessed Virgin, little hath been discovered to us. Christ, who commended the faith of the centurion, the love of Mary Magdalen, the excellences of John the Baptist, hath left not the least encomium of his mother. Ths evangelists, who have so punctually described the city, family, and genealogy, of Joseph, make no express mention of her relations, only of her cousin Elizabeth, who was of the tribe of Levi, "of the daughters of Aaron.". (Luke i. 5.) Although it be of absolute necessity to believe that he who was born of her descended from the tribe of Judah, and the family of David; yet hath not the Scripture clearly expressed so much of her, nor have we any more than an obscure tradition of her parents Joachim and Anna.*

Wherefore the title added to that name maketh the distinction for as divers characters are given to several persons by which they are distinguished from all others of the same common nomination, as Jacob is called Israel, and Abraham the friend of God, or father of the faithful; so is this Mary sufficiently characterized by that inseparable companion of her name, the Virgin. For the full explication whereof more cannot be required, than that we shew, first, That the Messias was to be born of a virgin, according to the prediction of the prophets; secondly, That this Mary, of whom Christ was born, was really a virgin when she bare him according to the rela

in Midrash yer, beside the two authors

נקראת מרים שמררו המצרים,before quoted yet still the addition of the final את חיי הם

mem is not proper; or if that should stand for on there were no good account to be given of the jod. Whereas if we deduce it from the radix D with the addition of the Heemantic mem, the notation is evident, and the signification clear, as of one exalted above others.

I call this a tradition, because not in the written word: and obscure, because the first mention we find of it was in the fourth century. Epiphanius first informs us, who speaking of Joseph, says he knew thus much : Γυναῖκα μὲν ᾔδει αὐτὴν τῇ πλάσει, καὶ θήλειαν τῇ φύσει, καὶ ἐκ μητρὸς ̓́Αννης, καὶ ἐκ πατρὸς Ἰωακείμ. Hæres. 78. §. 17. Again: Εἰ ἀγγέλους προσκυνεῖσθαι οὐ θέλει, πίσω μᾶλλον τὴν ἀπὸ ̓Αννης γεγεννημένην, τὴν ἐκ τοῦ Ἰωακεὶμ τῇ 'Αννα δεδωρημένην ; Hares. 79. §. 5. where he makes mention of the history of Mary, and the tradition concerning her nativity. Ἡ τῆς Μαρίας ἱστορία, καὶ παραδόσεις ἔχουσιν, ὅτι ἐῤῥέθη τῷ πατρὶ αὐτῆς Ἰωακεὶμ ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ, ὅτι ἡ γυνή σου evraλnpuĩa, &c. Damasc. Orthod. Fid. 1. iv. c. 15. and Orig. contra Celsum de Panthera, 1. i. §. 32. What this history of Mary was, or of what authority those traditions were, we cannot learn out of Epiphanius. What the interpolator of Gre

gory Nyssen's Homily produceth, he confesseth taken from apocryphal writings. And divers of the like relations descended from the prime and greatest heretics. The Gnostics had a book among them, which was called rewa Maglaç. Epiphan. Hæres. 26. §. 12. Amongst the Manichees Seleucus wrote the history of the Virgin. And the Protevangelium Jacobi deceived many in relations of this nature. Among which many being certainly false, it is not now easy (if at all possible) to distinguish what part of them or particular is true.

Quod de generatione Mariæ Faustus posuit, quod patrem habuerit ex tribu Levi sacerdotem quendam nomine Joachim, quia Canonicum non est, non me constringit,' saith St. Augustin, l. xxiii. contra Faustum, c. 9.

† Τίς πότε, ἢ ἐν ποίᾳ γενεᾷ τετόλμηκε καλεῖν τὸ ὄνομα Μαρίας τῆς ἁγίας, καὶ ἐρωτώμενος οὐκ εὐθὺς ἐπήνεγκε τὸ παρθένον; Ἐξ αὐτῶν γὰρ τῶν ἐπιθέτων ὀνομάτων καὶ τῆς ἀρετῆς ὑποφαίνει τὰ τεκμήρια. Αξιώματα μὲν γὰρ ὀνομασιῶν εἰλήφασιν οἱ δίκαιοι ἑκάστῳ πρεπόντως, καὶ ὡς ἥρω μοζε. Καὶ τῷ μὲν ̓Αβραὰμ προσετέθη τὸ, φίλος Θεοῦ, καὶ οὐ διαλυθήσεται· τῷ δὲ Ἰακὼβ, τὸ Ἰσραὴλ καλεῖσθαι, καὶ οὐκ ἀλλοιωθήσεται· καὶ τοῖς ̓Αποστόλοις, τὸ Βοανεργές, τουτέστιν, υἱοὶ βροντῆς, καὶ οὐκ ἀποκαταλειφθήσεται· καὶ τῇ ἁγίᾳ Μαρίᾳ, τὸ παρθένος, καὶ οὐ τραThera. Epiphan. Hæres. 78. §. 6.

tions of the evangelists; thirdly, That being at once the mother of the Son of God, and yet a virgin, she continued for ever in the same virginity, according to the tradition of the fathers, and the constant doctrine of the Church.

The obdurate Jew, that he might more easily avoid the truth. of the second, hath most irrationally denied the first; resolved rather not to understand Moses and the prophets, than to acknowledge the interpretation of the apostles. It will therefore be necessary from those oracles which were committed unto them, to shew the promised Messias was to be born after a miraculous manner, to be the son of a woman, not of a man. The first promise of him seems to speak no less, "the seed of the woman shall bruise the serpent's head :" (Gen. iii. 15.) for as the name of seed is not generally or collectively to be taken for the generation of mankind, but determinately and individually for that one seed, which is Christ; so the woman is not to be understood with relation unto man, but particularly and determinately to that ser from which alone immediately that seed should come.

*

According to this first evangelical promise followed that prediction of the prophet, "The Lord hath created a new thing on the earth, A woman shall compass a man." (Jer. xxxi. 22.) That new creation of a man is therefore new, and therefore a creation, because wrought in a woman only, without a man, compassing a man. Which interpretation of the prophet is ancient, literal, and clear; and whatsoever the Jews have invented to elude it, is frivolous and forced. For while they force the phrase of compassing a man, in the latter part of the prediction, to any thing else than a conception, they do not only wrest the Scripture, but contradict the former part of the promise, making the new creation neither new, as being often done, nor a creation, as being easy to perform.

[blocks in formation]

King, of whom it is written, (Psal. ii. 7.) "This day have begotten thee." And again in Midrash Tillim, upon the 2d Psalm, R. Huna in the name of R. Idi, speaking of the sufferings of the Messiah, saith, That when his hour is come, God

-must literally im נקבה תסובב גבר,words

port no less than that a woman shall encompass, or enclose a man, which, with the addition of a new creation, may well bear the interpretation of a miraculous conception. Especially considering that the ancient Jews did acknowledge this sense, and did apply it determinately to the Messias as appeareth in Bereshit Rabba Parash. 89. where shewing that God doth heal with that with which he woundeth, he saith, As he punished Israel in a virgin, so would he also heal them with a virgin, according to the prophet, "The Lord hath created a new thing on the earth, a wo

[blocks in formation]

But if this prophecy of Jeremy seem obscure, it will be sufficiently cleared by that of Isaiah, "Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Emmanuel." (Isa. vii. 14.) The ancient Jews immediately upon the promulgation of the Gospel, understanding well how near this place did press them, gave three several answers to this text: First, denying that it spake of a virgin at all; † secondly, asserting that it could not belong to Jesus, thirdly, affirming that it was fully completed in the person of Hezekiah. Whereas the

original word was translated a virgin, by such interpreters|| as were Jews themselves, some hundred years before our Saviour's birth. And did not the notation of the word, and frequent use thereof in the Scriptures, persuade it, the wonder of the sign given by the Lord himself would evince as much. But as for that conceit, that all should be fulfilled in Hezekiah, it is so manifestly and undoubtedly false, that nothing can make more for the confirmation of our faith. For this sign was given and this promise made (" a virgin shall conceive and bear a son") at some time in the reign of Ahaz. This "Ahaz reigned but sixteen years in Jerusalem;" (2 Kings xvi. 2.) and Hezekiah his son, who succeeded him, was twenty and five years old when he began to reign," (2 Kings xviii. 2.) and therefore born several years before Ahaz was king, and consequently not now to be conceived when this sign was given. Thus while the ancient Jews name him only to fulfil the prophecy in whom it

• How soon these objections were made use of by the Jews, will appear by Justin Martyr, the first writer which made any considerable explication and defence of the Christian religion; who, in his dialogue with Trypho the Jew, shews us what were the objections of the Rabbins: 'Emel dè ὑμεῖς καὶ οἱ διδάσκαλοι ὑμῶν τολμᾶτε λέγειν, μηδὲ εἰρῆσθαι ἐν τῇ προφητείᾳ τοῦ ̔Ησαίου, ἰδοὺ ἡ παρθένος ἐν γαστρὶ ἕξει, ἀλλ ̓, ἰδοὺ ἡ νεάνις ἐν γαστρὶ λήψεται, καὶ τέξεται ὑιόν. p. 262. And Tertullian, whose works are full of the divinity of Justin: 'Si quando ad dejiciendos aliquos ab hac divina prædicatione, vel convertere singulos simplices quosque gestitis, mentiri audetis, quasi non Virginem, sed juvenculam, concepturam Scriptura contineat.' Advers. Judæos, cap. 9. et adv. Marcionem, lib. iii. cap. 13.

And as they soon began, so did they go on, with this objection: Hodie toto jam credente mundo, argumentantur Judæi, Esaia docente de Maria et virginitate ejus, Ecce virgo in utero concipiet, et pariet filium, in Hebræo juvenculam scriptum esse, non virginem, id est, halma, non bethula.' S. Hieron. adv. Helvid. col. 439.

Dicunt Judæi, Provocemus istam prædicationem Esaiæ, et faciamus comparationem, an Christo, qui jam venit, competat illi primo nomen quod Esaias

66

prædicavit, et insignia ejus quæ de eo nunciavit. Equidem Esaias prædicat eum Emmanuelem vocari oportere, dehinc virtutem sumpturum Damasci et spolia Samariæ adversus regem Assyriorum. Porro, inquiunt, iste qui venit neque sub ejusmodi nomine est dictus, neque re bellica functus.' Tertull. adv. Judæos, c. 9.

So Justin testifieth of the Jews, speaking to Trypho, and in him to them: Εξηγεῖσθε τὴν προφητείαν ὡς εἰς Εζεκίαν τὸν γενόμενον ὑμῶν βασιλέα. p. 262. And Trypho replies again to Justin : Ιδωμεν ὡς ἐκεῖνον εἰς Χριστὸν τὸν ὑμέτερον ἀποδεικνύεις εἰρῆσθαι, ἡμεῖς γὰρ εἰς Εζεκίαν αὐτὴν λέγομεν πεπροφητεῦσθαι. p. 302.

| The LXX. Ἰδοὺ ἡ παρθένος ἐν γαστρὶ Aneral. It is true, the rest of the interpreters, concurring with the objection of the Jews, translated it, '18ùn vɛãviç, i. e. adolescentula, or juvencula. But as their antiquity so their authority is far short of the LXX. especially in this case. I shall not need to shew how the origination of

[ocr errors]

by from by proves no less. We know the affinity of the Punic tongue with the Hebrew; and by the testimony of St. Jerome, Lingua Punica, quæ de Hebræorum fontibus manare dicitur, proprie virgo alma appellatur.' V. Lib. Quæst. Heb. in Gen. c. 24. v. 43.

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 it 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 evangelists, 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

[blocks in formation]

Messias to the Israelites, because they have already enjoyed him in the days of Hezekiah. Divers of the latter Rabbins endeavour to mollify these words of Hillel by their several expositions, but in vain. And R. Joseph understood him better, who thought he took away all expectation of a Messias, and therefore fairly prayed for him, Condonet Dominus hoc R. Hillel. Howsoever, it appears that from two principles, whereof one was false, he gathered that false conclusion. For first, he thought those words in Isaiah were spoken of the Messias which proposition was true. Secondly, he conceived that those were spoken of Hezekiah, and fulfilled in him : which proposition was false. From hence

[ocr errors]

he inferred, that the Israelites were not to expect a Messias after Hezekiah: which conclusion was also false.

Hæc est virgo quæ in utero concepit, virgoque peperit filium. Sic enim scriptum est, Ecce virgo in utero concipiet, et pariet Filium. Non enim concepturam tantummodo Virginem, sed et parituram Virginem dixit.' S. Ambros. Epist. 7. ad Siricium. So he argued from the prophecy, and St. Augustin from the Creed:

Si vel per nascentem corrumperetur ejus integritas, non jam ille de Virgine nasceretur; eumque falso, quod absit, de virgine natum tota confiteretur Ecclesia, quæ, imitans ejus matrem, quotidie parit membra, et Virgo est.' Enchir. c. 34. As also St. Ambrose in the same epistle : "Quæ potuit Virgo concipere, potuit Virgo generare, quum semper conceptus præce

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; and not only so

dat, partus sequatur. Sed si doctrinis non creditur sacerdotum, credatur oraculis Christi, credatur monitis Angelorum, credatur Symbolo Apostolorum, quod Ecclesia Romana intemeratum semper custodit et servat.' And St. Basil upon occasion of the same prophecy: 'Hairn γυνὴ καὶ παρθένος καὶ μήτηρ, καὶ ἐν τῷ ἁγι ασμό της παρθενίας μένουσα, καὶ τὴν τῆς τεκνογονίας εὐλογίαν κληρονομοῦσα. Homil. in Sanct. Christ. Gen. §. 4. Virgo peperit, quia Virgo concepit.' Vigil. de unitate Trinit. c. 10.

Μέχρι γὰρ τῆς κατὰ τὴν οἰκονομίαν ὑπη ρεσίας ἀναγκαία ἡ παρθενία, τὸ δ ̓ ἐφεξῆς ἀπολυπραγμόνητον τῷ λόγῳ τοῦ μυστηρίου καταAr. S. Basil. Homil, in Sanct. Christ. Gen. §. 5.

+ For so the Greek Church always called her ἀειπάρθενος, and from them the Latins, Semper Virgo.

First we read in the time of Origen, that some did maintain the virginity of Mary no longer than to Christ's nativity. In tantam nescio quis prorupit insaniam, ut assereret negatam fuisse Mariam a Salvatore, eo quod post nativitatem illius juncta fuerit Josepho.' Homil. 7. in Lucam. Tertullian himself was produced as an assertor of the same opinion; nor does St. Jerome deny it, though I think he

might have done it. Apollinaris, or at least his followers, delivered the same, says Epiphanius, and Eunomius with his, τὸν Ἰωσὴφ μετὰ τὴν ἄφραστον κυοφορίαν συν άπτειν οὐ πεφρίκασι τῇ παρθένω, as Photius out of Philostorgius. Not that these words in Photius were the words of Philostorgius, for he was clearly an Eunomian, and therefore would never express their opinions with an οὐ πεφρίκασι. And as he always commended Eunomius, so he was not commended but by an Eunomian, that is, a man of his own sect. As that epigram,

Ευνομιανοῦ.

Ιστορίην ἐτέλεσσα Θεοῦ χαρίτεσσι σοφῇσι. Which I therefore menti u, because Gotofred hath made an unnecessary emendation in the verse, ἐτέλεσσ' αθέου, and a worse interpretation in the inscription, taking the Eunomian to be a Catholic, and the name of the sect for the name of a man; and confirming this error by a greater mistake, saying Eunomianus was the name of a man, twice spoken of in Suidas, once in Eivouavòs and again in Eλours. It is true indeed Suidas saith expressly, Ευνομιανός, ὄνομα κύριον, and imme diately adds these words, τὸν δὲ Εὐνομιανὸν ἔλουσε Βελισάριος τὸ θεῖον λουτρὸν, as if Belisarius bad baptized one whose name

« ZurückWeiter »