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

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

+ For so the Greek Church always called her asάplɛvos, 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 συνάπτειν οὐ Teppikαoι Ty Taplévy, 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 où TεppikaσI. 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 σου

φῇσι.

Which I therefore mention, because Gotofred hath made an unnecessary emendation in the verse, étéλɛoo' ådéou, 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 Evvoμiavos and again in λovoɛ. It is true indeed Suidas saith expressly, Evvoμiavos, õvopa кúpov, and immediately adds these words, ròu dè Evvoμiavòv λovσe Beλiσápis тò Oct̃ov λovтpòv, as if Belisarius had baptized one whose name was Eunomianus. But the words are taken out of Procopius in Hist. Arcana, p. 2. from whence it appears that he who was baptized was by name Theodosius, and by sect an Eunomian. And whatsoever his name was who wrote that epigram on the History of Philostorgius, he was certainly by sect an Eunomian, and that

περιορισμὸν ὑποφαίνειν, κατὰ δὲ τὴν ἀλήθειαν τὸ ἀόριστον δείκνυσιν. S. Basil. Homil. in Sanct. Christ. Gen. §. 5. Εθος τῷ γραφῇ τὴν ῥῆσιν ταύτην μὴ ἐπὶ dupioμivov Tilévai xpóvov. S. Chrysost. in Matt. Homil. 5. To "Ews Toλλákiç καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ διηνεκῶς ἐν τῇ θείᾳ γραφῇ εύpiokoμev kɛipevov. Isid. Pelus. lib. i. ep. 18. Tò "Ewç πodλaxoũ ovk έπì xpóνου λέγει, ἀλλ ̓ ἐπὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ πράγματος. Adria. Isag. in S. S. To "Ews ¿viote μὲν πρὸς ἀντιδιαστολὴν τοῦ ἐφεξῆς χρό νου παραλαμβάνεται, ἐνίοτε δ ̓ οὖν ἐπὶ δηλώσει μεγάλων μὲν ἔργων καί θεοπρε πῶν· καθάπερ καὶ νῦν οὐ μὲν πρὸς ἀντιδιαστολὴν ἑτέρου χρόνου τινὸς, ἀλλὰ καὶ ¿vavríov eis vπodýλwow åreρávrov diaornparos. Phot. ep. 30. In the same manner it is observed by the Greek grammarians of piv, that if any one declared that he did it not ρiv before such a thing were done, it followeth not that he did it when or after that thing was done. As when Helena saw and knew Ulysses a spy in Troy, she promised upon oath that she would discover him to none till he was safe returned to the Grecian fleet;

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 intended in the inscription, written without question by some Catholic, who thought no man could commend the History of Philostorgius but one of his own opinion. These contradictors of the perpetual virginity of the mother of our Lord afterwards increased to a greater number, whom Epiphanius calls by a general name Antidicomarianita. And from him St. Augustin: Antidicomarianita appellati sunt Hæretici, qui Maria Virginitati usque adeo contradicunt, ut affirment eam post Christum natum viro suo fuisse commixtam.'de Hares. 56. condemned under that name by the sixth general Council, Act.2. [xi.] The same were called by the Latins, Helvidiani, from Helvidius (a disciple of Auxentius the Arian), whose name is most made use of, because refuted by St. Jerome. He was followed by Jovinian, a monk of Milan, as St. Jerome testifieth; though St. Augustin delivereth his opinion otherwise: 'Virginitatem Mariæ destruebat, dicens eam pariendo fuisse corruptam.' Hares. 82. And Bonosus, a bishop in Macedonia, referred by the Council of Capua to the judgment of Anysius bishop of Thessalonica, was condemned for the same, as appeareth by the Πρίν γε τὸν ἐς νῆάς τε θοὰς κλισίας 79th Ep. of St. Ambrose, written to ἀφικέσθαι. Od. A. v. 253. Theophilus and Anysius: Sane non And yet it is not likely (says Eupossumus negare de Mariæ filiis jure stathius), that Helena did ever disreprehensum, meritoque vestram cover Ulysses to the Trojans after he Sanctitatem abhorruisse, quod ex eo- was returned: 'Ev dè ræ, My πρiv dem utero virginali, ex quo secundum Οδυσσήα Τρωσὶν ἀναφῆναι, πρὶν αὐτὸν carnem Christus natus est, alius par- εἰς νῆας ἱκέσθαι, εἴπερ μὴ δοκεῖ πιθανὸν tus effusus sit. This is the catalogue ἢ εὐλόγιστον τὸ ἀναφῆναι ὅλως τὸν of those by the ancients accounted' Οδυσσῆα τοῖς Τρωσὶν, ἐνθυμητέον τὴν heretics, for denying the perpetual virginity of the mother of our Lord.

* For in the word Ἕως there is no such force. Τὸ ἕως οὗ πάντως ἀντιδιαιρεῖται τῷ μέλλοντι, ἀλλὰ τὸ μέχρι μὲν τοῦδε τίθησι, τὸ μετὰ τοῦτο δὲ οὐκ ἀναίVETAL. S. Greg. Naz. Orat. 2. de Filio. Τὸ ἕως πολλαχοῦ χρόνου μέν τινα δοκεῖ

Καὶ ὤμοσα καρτερὸν ὅρκον, Μὴ μὲν πρὶν Ὀδυσῆα μετὰ Τρώεσσ' ἀναφῆναι,

δύναμιν τοῦ, μὴ πρὶν ποιῆσαι τόδε τι πρὶν ἂν τόδε γένηται, (ἥτις ἐν τῇ Α ῥαψῳδία τῆς Ἰλιάδος κεῖται) καὶ φανεῖται ἐκεῖθεν, ὡς οὐκ εἰκὸς τὴν Ἑλένην εἰπεῖν τοῖς Ἰλιεῦσι περὶ τοῦ Ὀδυσσέως οὐδὲ ὅτε εἰς νῆας καὶ κλισίας ἀφίκετο αὐτός. A negation anteceding ρiv of wc, is no affirınation following them.

was said of Moses," No man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day;" (Deut. xxxiv. 6.) but it were a weak argument to 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?

66

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 cer tainty, but a suspension of obedience; nor had the first-born 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,† nor could it have been required of him, till a second offspring had ap peared; 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,

* For I shall not deny that Christ was called the first-born in respect of his mother, though Epiphanius thought that a sufficient answer: Our εἶπεν, ὅτι ἐγέννησε τὸν πρωτότοκον αὐτῆς· ἀλλ ̓ οὐκ ἔγνω αὐτὴν, ἕως ἐγέννησε τὸν υἱὸν αὐτῆς. καὶ οὐκ εἶπε, τὸν πρωτότρκον αὐτῆς, ἀλλὰ τὸν πρωτότοκον. Επὶ μὲν γὰρ τῷ υἱῷ αὐτῆς ἐσήμανεν, ἐξ αὐτῆς Kaтà σáрka yeɣevvñolai ini de rỹ to πρωτοτόκου ἐπωνυμίᾳ οὐκέτι τὸ αὐτῆς ἔθετο, ἀλλὰ πρωτότοκον μόνον. Hares. 78. §. 17. As if her son the first-born were not her first-born son. Où ráv τως ὁ πρωτότοκος πρὸς τοὺς ἐπιγινομένους ἔχει τὴν σύγκρισιν, ἀλλ' ὁ πρῶτον διανοίγων μήτραν Πρωτότοκος ὀνομάζε Tat. S. Basil. Hom. in Sanct. Christ.

both of man and beast, it is mine." (Exod. xiii. 2.) The apertion of the womb determineth the first-born;* and the law of 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 without, 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.

* Definivit sermo Dei, quid sit Primogenitum; Omne, inquit, quod aperit vulvam.” S. Hier. adv. Helv. col. 443.

+ Origen first delivereth it on St. Matt. and Eusebius sheweth his opinion, speaking of St. James the brother of our Lord, Hist. Eccl. 1. ii. c. 1. Τότε δῆτα καὶ Ἰάκωβον τὸν τοῦ Κυρίου λεγόμενον ἀδελφὸν, ὅτι δὴ καὶ οὗτος Ἰωσὴφ ὠνόμαστο παῖς, τοῦ δὲ Χριστοῦ πατὴρ ὁ Ἰωσήφ. So we read, as it is set forth by R. Stephan. But in my book collated with an ancient MS. "Ort de cai ovros viòs v Toυ Ἰωσὴφ τοῦ νομιζομένου οἱονεὶ πατρός τοῦ Χριστοῦ. Which is much more plain; for ὠνόμαστο παῖς is nothing so pertinent in this particular, as υἱὸς ἦν. So Epiphanius: "Hv yàp o 'Iákwßog οὗτος υἱὸς τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ ἐκ γυναικὸς τοῦ 'Iwʊηp, ovк åπò Mapíaç. Hæres. 29. §. 4. And Hares. 42. §. 12. speaking of the rest he calls them: Tous vious 'Iwond ἐκ τῆς ὄντως αὐτοῦ ἄλλης γυναικός. Thus St. Hilary: Homines pravissimi hinc præsumunt opinionis suæ auctoritatem, quod plures Dominum nostru.n fratres habuisse sit traditum, quasi Mariæ illi fuissent, et non po

6

tius Joseph ex priore conjugio suscepti.' Com. in Matt. c. 1. Thus also St. Ambrose de Virg. And generally all the fathers to that time, and the Greeks afterwards. St. Chrysostom, St. Cyril, Euthymius, Theophylact, Ecumenius, and Nicephorus. These all seem to have followed an old tradition, which is partly still continued, in Epiphanius: "Έσχε δὲ οὗτος ὁ Ἰωσὴφ τὴν μὲν πρώτην αὐτοῦ γυναῖκα ἐκ τῆς φυλῆς ̓Ιούδα· καὶ κυίσκει αὐτῷ αὕτη παῖδας τὸν ἀριθμὸν ἕξ, τέσσαρας μὲν ἄῤῥενας, θηλείας δὲ δύο. Hares. 78. §. 7. The first of these six children was James: μετ' αὐτὸν δὲ γίνεται παῖς Ἰωσῆ καλούμενος, εἶτα μετ ̓ αὐτὸν Συμεών, ἔπειτα Ιούδας· καὶ δύο θυγατέ ρες, ἡ Μαρία, καὶ ἡ Σαλώμη καλουμένη. Ibid. §. 8. Thus had the Greeks a distinct relation of the sons and daughters of Joseph, and of the order of their generation. Whose authority I shall conclude with that of Jobius Econ. I. ix. Ἔδει πατέρα καὶ ἀδελφοὺς ἐπὶ γῆς ὀνομάσαι τὸν ἀπάτορα, οὐκ ἐκ τῶν ληστῶν καὶ πονηρῶν τούτους ἐξε λέξατο, ἀλλὰ τοὺς ἐν δικαιοσύνη διαλάμποντας· τοιοῦτος γὰρ Ἰωσὴφ, καὶ οἱ τούrov raïdes. In Phot. Biblioth. 222. c.38.

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 fraternity, but also the larger of consanguinity; and therefore it is sufficient satisfaction for that expression, that there were such persons allied unto the blessed Virgin. “We be brethren," (Gen. xiii. 8.) said Abraham unto Lot; when Abraham was the son of Terah, Lot of Haran, and consequently not his brother, but his nephew, and, as elsewhere properly styled, "the son of his brother." (Gen. xii. 5.) "Moses called Mishael and Elzaphan the sons of Uzziel the uncle of Aaron, and said unto them, Come near, carry your brethren from before the sanctuary:" (Lev. x. 4.) whereas those brethren were Nadab and Abihu, the sons, not of Uzziel, but of Aaron. "Jacob told Rachel that he was her father's brother, and that he was Rebekah's son;" (Gen. xxix. 12.) whereas Rebekah was the sister of Rachel's father. It is sufficient therefore, that the evangelists, according to the constant language of the Jews, call the kindred of the blessed Virgin the brethren and sisters of her only son; which indeed is something the later, but the most generally approved, answer.*

col. 642. And that of Amphilochius titulum habet juxta Petrum, aut ex Jun. Ηπίστησαν δέ ποτε καὶ οἱ τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ υἱοὶ, καθὼς μαρτυρεῖ ὁ Εὐαγγελιστὴς, καὶ τῇ πείρᾳ διδαχθέντες τὸ ἀληθὲς, γεγραφήκασιν Ἰάκωβος καὶ Ἰούδας παντὶ τῷ κοσμῷ, Θεοῦ καὶ Κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δούλους ἑαυτοὺς εἶναι. Orat. in Deip. in fin.

libro Jacobi) filios Joseph ex priore uxore, quæ convixerat ipsi antequam duceret Mariam. In Matt. xiii. 55. This Jacobus mentioned by Origen, is the same with him whom Eustathius mentions in Hexaemero, p. 70. ed. Lugd. 1629. ̓́Αξιον δὲ τὴν ἱστορίαν, ἣν διέξεισι περὶ τῆς ἁγίας Μαρίας Ιάκωβός τις, ἐπελθεῖν. Where he reckons Joseph inter τοὺς χηρεύοντας, and Epiphanius calls 'Iákwßog 'Eßpatos. Lib. de Vit. B. Mariæ. Virg.

The first, I conceive, who returned this answer was St. Jerome, in a tractate written in his youth at Rome against Helvidius; wherein, after a long discourse of several acceptions of brethren in the Scriptures, St. Jerome therefore observing that he thus concludes: Restat igitur, ut fratres eos intelligas appellatos cognatione, non affectu, non gentis privilegio, non natura, quo modo Lot Abrahæ, quo modo Jacob Laban est appellatus frater.' Adv. Helvid. col. 448. And as for the other opinion of those which went before him, he says it was grounded merely upon an apocryphal history, Com. in Matt. c. xii. 49. col. 639. 6 Quidam fratres Domini de alia uxore Joseph filios suspicantur, sequentes deliramenta Apocryphorum, et quandam Escham mulierculam confingentes.' Indeed Origen himself, followed in this particular by the Greek Church, did confess no less; who tells the authors from whom that interpretation first arose: 'Fratres autem Jesu putabant nonnulli esse, (ex traditione Hebræorum sumpta occasione, ex evangelio quod

the former opinion of Joseph's sons was founded merely upon an apocryphal writing, and being ready to assert the virginity of Joseph as well as Mary, first invented the other solution in the kindred of Mary, as founded not only in the language, but also testimony of the Scriptures: Quidam fratres Domini de alia uxore Joseph filios suspicantur, sequentes deliramenta Apocryphorum, et quandam Escham mulierem confingentes. Nos autem sicut in libro quem contra Helvidium scripsimus continetur, fratres Domini non filios Joseph, sed consobrinos Salvatoris, Mariæ liberos intelligimus materteræ Domini, quæ esse dicitur mater Jacobi minoris et Joseph et Judæ, quos in alio Evangelii loco fratres Domini legimus appellatos. Fratres autem consobrinos dici omnis Scriptura demonstrat.' S.,