Bloody Mary, Mother of God

[vovat]

Since I haven't been keeping up with my Bible-based posts on Sundays, I might as well just go ahead and write my intended post on the Virgin Mary now. Mary is, of course, the celebrated mother of Jesus, who gave birth to the avatar of the Lord without having to go through all that pesky sex first. Well, at least that's the story that developed, but it's generally believed that the earliest written Gospel was that of Mark, and it makes no mention of Jesus having been born of a virgin. You'd think that would have been kind of important, wouldn't you? The idea of a virgin giving birth to the child of a god was a pretty common one, so it's certainly possible that later Christians grafted this idea onto the story of the founder of their religion. But that would be a blasphemous suggestion, wouldn't it? :P The verse from Isaiah that Matthew quotes as prophetic support was actually mistranslated into Greek (the more accurate translation is simply "young woman," not "virgin") and most likely refers to a contemporary of Isaiah. The Catholic Church took this a few steps further, saying that Mary was conceived without sin, and that she remained a virgin even after the birth of Jesus. Even if we accept that the Biblical story of Jesus' birth is true, this is a rather untenable idea. According to Matthew 1:24-25, "Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS." If Mary never had any other children, why specify that she remained a virgin until after the birth of her FIRSTBORN? Later passages give Jesus four brothers and at least two sisters, giving the impression that he was actually the first of many children for Mary and Joseph. How did the Catholic Church get around this? Well, one of the first documents to address the matter was the second century Protoevangelium of James, which claimed that Joseph was a widower who was much older than Mary, and had already fathered several children before becoming engaged to her. I think changing James from Jesus' younger brother to older stepbrother changes the dynamic somewhat, but that's another topic. Other Catholic thinkers decided that the "brothers" and "sisters" were actually some other sort of relatives. As much fun as it is to play theological games like these, keep in mind that this debate wasn't even intended to resolve one of the many contradictions in the Bible, but rather to harmonize the Bible with the rather disturbing and misogynistic extra-Biblical idea that Mary could only be "pure" if she remained a virgin throughout her whole life. While the Catholic and Orthodox Churches still hold to this idea, many Protestant denominations have discarded it.



Critics of Catholicism have said that the veneration of Mary is a holdover from paganism. The official Catholic doctrine is that Mary, like angels and saints, isn't actually worshipped as such, but I'm not sure the distinction makes a whole lot of difference outside Catholic theology. I believe Muhammad mistakenly thought Mary was part of the Catholic Holy Trinity, which Muslims reject. Why monotheism is now typically viewed as superior to polytheism seems to me to be due more to politics than to what's actually more likely. Still, the critics have somewhat of a point in that there might well be a connection between strong mother goddess traditions and the veneration of Mary. I remember learning in my Russian History class, for instance, that the worship of the traditional Great Mother Goddess sort of morphed into a cult of Mary when Christianity became the national religion.



Even without taking the doctrines of perpetual virginity and Mary being the highest of all women into consideration, there's a lot about Mary that isn't really consistent. The story of Jesus' mother and brothers arriving to see him suggests that Mary didn't yet believe that her son was the Messiah, yet this would have been after his miraculous birth, as well as presumably after the wedding at Cana that John mentions, at which Mary seems to know of her son's powers. The Gospels do appear to be consistent on the point that Mary was present at the crucifixion, although none mention Joseph being there, suggesting he might have already died by this point. The Catholic belief is that Mary was eventually taken bodily into Heaven, while other denominations think she died normally. Really, most of what was written about her is far from first-hand, so we'll probably never know what she was like in real life, if indeed she existed. And her husband Joseph is even more elusive, to the point where scholars aren't even totally sure he was actually a carpenter.

Comments

[burningofroissy.livejournal.com]

If Mary never had any other children, why specify that she remained a virgin until after the birth of her FIRSTBORN?...How did the Catholic Church get around this?

More to the point, how did Jesus get around Mary being a virgin, if you know what I mean? That must've been a helluva tough squeeze.

[vovat.livejournal.com]

I believe I read recently about a debate over whether Mary's hymen remained intact when Jesus was born, and the conclusion was that it did. Not sure how that would work, but it does go to show that there's no theological question so crazy that religious scholars haven't seriously discussed it. In a future post, I'll probably have a bit to say about the search for Jesus' foreskin.

[rockinlibrarian.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I heard "those mentions of Jesus's brothers and sisters, that was just what they called his COUSINS," but I never fell for that. I'm more willing to accept the idea of a virgin birth, but the continued virginity during a happy marriage is just taking it too far.

But I can dig the whole virgin birth/son of God thing from a mythological standpoint. The greatest heroes were ALWAYS part-god of some sort. It belongs. Whether that means it happened historically is actually a moot point to me.

Also, I guess I see what you mean about Mary-worship "depending on your definition of worship." I can clearly see the difference, but I'm Catholic. And granted, the differences developed from an outdated and plain out WRONG theology that happened in the dark ages in effort to keep the lower classes down, but even though I (and the Church) now believe ordinary folk ARE worthy of praying directly to God, I still like the idea of chatting up the saints for intersessions and wouldn't want to take that away. It's not the same as idol worship or whatever because, what, does that mean you can't have a talk with ANYONE who's gone before? You can't ask your grandmother to watch over you as you do something she would have approved of? If she was ALIVE, it wouldn't be considered worship if you asked her for support. But I suppose such things are considered "ancestor worship" in some cultures, so I guess it is a matter of terminology.

[vovat.livejournal.com]

I'm more willing to accept the idea of a virgin birth, but the continued virginity during a happy marriage is just taking it too far.

It kind of seems antithetical to the Catholic position that sex is only sinful OUTSIDE marriage to turn around and say, "But if you're REALLY good, like the mother of Our Lord, you won't have sex even when you ARE married."

[rockinlibrarian.livejournal.com]

And kind of ruins the whole Be Fruitful and Multiply thing. Now, if like the Shakers or some other celibate sect/cult believed that, it would make more sense.

[(Anonymous)]

My two-cents:

My sister and I, having been raised in a secular household, had never heard of Jesus' siblings until we were adults. My sister's father (don't ask) is a tour-guide in Isreal (still, don't ask) and my sister heard about the siblings on one of his tours and marveled at how the concept of a woman with lots and lots of kids but no sex (or associations with sex, of course she had sex, but she's seen as a virgin) would really appeal to a patriarchy.

Anyhow: I'm sure you all heard this joke before but if not, it's a good one:

Q: How can you tell that Jesus was Jewish?
A: His mother thought he was God, and he thought she was a virgin.

(Oh, I'm jewish by the way, so consider that a "We're laughing with you, not at you" joke. I give you permission to find it funny.)

[vovat.livejournal.com]

My sister's father (don't ask) is a tour-guide in Isreal (still, don't ask) and my sister heard about the siblings on one of his tours and marveled at how the concept of a woman with lots and lots of kids but no sex (or associations with sex, of course she had sex, but she's seen as a virgin) would really appeal to a patriarchy.

That could be why the Catholic Church was so eager to find a way for Jesus' brothers not to be brothers at all.

[(Anonymous)]

But think about it. "Be like Mary! Have lots and lots of kids but never ever have sex." Impossible ideals! Right up the Catholic church's aisle. "What, you don't have kids! That's selfish!" "What you have kids? That means you had sex and I'm onto you....."

[vovat.livejournal.com]

What's weird is that, despite all that, the Catholic Church tends to come out AGAINST method of reproduction that DON'T involve having sex.