THE PERPETUAL VIRGINITY OF MARY
Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of
James, and Joses,
and of Jude, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us?
And they were offended at him.
Mark 6, 3
This verse from the Gospel
of Mark is often cited by many Protestants to support their objection to the
Catholic dogma of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary. They draw their faulty
conclusion by singling out words or terms that catch their attention and apply
modern English semantic or idiomatic usage to them to accommodate their
preconceived notions. In the above verse, the two words that draw their
attention are “brother” and “sisters.” They presume these terms mean uterine
siblings, as they customarily do in modern English and Western culture, and so
they adopt this verse as a proof-text against the Catholic de fide doctrine of
Mary Ever-Virgin.
However, the word “brother”
( ach/אָח ) had a broad semantic
range in ancient Hebrew culture. It did not apply only to male uterine
siblings. In Genesis 3:18, for instance, the word is being used to describe the
relationship between Abraham and Lot, who were in fact uncle and nephew: ‘So Abram
said to Lot, “Let’s not have any quarreling between you and me, or between your
herdsmen and mine, for we are brothers.”’ The same goes for the Hebrew word
“sister” (achoth/אָחוֹת ). The word did not apply only to female siblings in the immediate
family, but also to members of the extended family and even a tribe. We read in
Songs 4:12: ‘A garden enclosed is my sister (achoth), my spouse; a spring dried
up, a fountain sealed.’ A man, such as King Solomon, could even call his wife a
sister when expressing his deep affection for her. Thus, we mustn’t carelessly
ignore the broad Semitic idiomatic usage of the words “brother” and “sister”
when reading the Bible, which often must be read through Jewish lenses – even
the New Testament.
Returning to the Gospel of
Mark, we see with certainty that the author retains the broad Semitic idiomatic
usage of the word “brother” (adelphos/ἀδελφός) in his writing, even though the sacred text has been originally
written in Koine Greek. Most of his audience were Hellenistic Jews who would
have understood the evangelist’s use of diction.
This is evident in Mark 6:17-18: ‘ For Herod himself had
given orders to have John arrested, and he had him bound and put in prison. He
did this because of Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife, whom he had
married. For John had been saying to Herod, “It is not lawful for you to
have your brother’s wife.”’ Are we to presume, in
accord with our language culture, that Herod Antipas and Philip were uterine
brothers? Certainly not! Herod Antipas was the son of Mariamne the Hasmonean,
Herod the Great’s second wife. Philip the Tetrarch (Herod Philip 1) was the son
of Cleopatra of Jerusalem, Herod’s fifth wife.
The two men, then, are
half-brothers, having the same father but different mothers. Mark employs the
Semitic idiomatic term because there is no single word for half-brother or
stepbrother in Hebrew and Aramaic. Unfortunately, some Protestants overlook or
choose to ignore this passage when citing Mark 6:3 (cf. Mt 12:46-50) as a
proof-text against the Catholic dogma of Mary’s perpetual virginity. And they
fail to notice or choose not to note that these supposedly biological brothers
and sisters of Jesus are never called sons and daughters of Mary in the New
Testament, though only Jesus himself is explicitly referred to as her son or
male offspring (Mk 6:3; Lk 2:6; Jn. 2:1; Acts 1:14).
Further, Catholics
reasonably maintain that James, Joses, Jude (Thaddeus), and Simon were cousins
of Jesus. Three of them, save Joses (Joseph), were also apostles of his. ‘And
he appointed the twelve: Simon (to whom he gave the name Peter), and James, the
son of Zebedee, and John, the brother of James (to them he gave the name
Boanerges, which means, “Sons of Thunder”); and Andrew, and Philip, and
Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and
Thaddeus, and Simon the Zealot; and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him’ (Mk 3,
16-19). These three apostles are grouped together in the same order, just as
they are in 6:3 because they are biological brothers whose father or
step-father isn’t Joseph but Alphaeus/Clopas, his brother. Meanwhile, they are
ranked in order according to their age from eldest to youngest. It would
certainly be an incredible coincidence if Jesus had uterine brothers not only
with the same names but also ranking in the same order of age identically as
these three apostles. Further, James and Joses are identified as being the sons
of another Mary, the wife of Alphaeus/Clopas, and sister-in-law of our Lord’s
mother (Mk 15:40; Mt 27:56; Jn 19:25). This makes them cousins of Jesus.
Now, these “brothers” of
Jesus aren’t recorded to have accompanied Mary at the foot of the cross along
with the Disciple and the group of women, which is highly unusual in Jewish
family culture. The reason is these ‘brothers’ are apostles and cousins of Jesus
and are in hiding after they fled from the Garden of Gethsemane when he was
arrested (Mk 14:50; Jn 20:19). Protestants, however, contend or presume that
our Lord’s brothers refused to attend his execution because they had disowned
him for his madness and did not come to believe in him until after his
resurrection (Acts 1:14). But if this were so, Jesus would not have entrusted
his beloved disciple with the care of his mother (Jn 19:26-27). Surely, he
would have foreseen the eventual conversion of his male siblings, who under
Mosaic law were required to look after their widowed mother, if this were the
case.
.webp)
Apparently, John was
prompted and morally encouraged by the Holy Spirit to be present with Mary
beneath the cross as the corporate personality of the Church. The Blessed
Virgin’s other children are those who give testimony to Jesus by their acts of
faith and keep God’s commandments (Rev 12:17). This is what Jesus meant by
calling his mother “Woman” from the cross before he addressed his beloved
disciple and brother of his in spirit (Rom 8:29). Mary became John’s mother and
him, by his faith, her son in God’s family which transcends all biological
blood ties and national boundaries (Mt 12:47-50).
That the apostle James (the
Less/Younger/Just) is referred to as “the brother of the Lord” is clear in the
following passage: ‘Then after three years I did go up to Jerusalem to visit
Cephas and stayed with him fifteen days, but I did not see any other apostle
except James the Lord’s brother’ (Gal. 1:18-19). The term apostle may indeed
apply to any disciple or follower of Christ. But given the context in the above
passage, it refers to one who belongs to the Twelve, the college of the
Apostles, of which Peter (Cephas) and James, son of Alphaeus, are members. They
are in the same league together, so to speak. Ironically, when Protestants
refer to this event to prove that Jesus had a brother by the name of James, in
support of Mark 6:3, they ignore Verse 18.
Thus, James whom Paul
mentions is acknowledged to be an apostle in the same capacity as Peter is. So,
when Paul goes to Jerusalem, he sees just two of the Twelve, namely Peter and
James the Less (also called the Just), the Bishop of Jerusalem. In other words,
he does not see any of the apostles besides Peter and James. Only Peter and
James are present from among the Twelve when Paul goes to Jerusalem. James,
Joses, Jude, and Simon are called “brothers” because there is no single word
for cousin in the Hebrew-Aramaic language.
The Hebrew term for cousin
is בר דוד or bar duḏ, which literally
stated means “Uncle’s-son”. Jeremiah uses the term, ben dodo, “son of his
uncle” (Jer. 32:8). Of course, the son of an uncle is a male cousin, so this
term is a circumlocution, not a word as “son” (ben) and “uncle” (dodo). A
circumlocution is several words that are used where a smaller number or only
one word should or could be used. Syriac Aramaic does have a related word for
cousin, which is achyana, but this is also used for kinsfolk in general, not
just specifically for a cousin. The Jennings Lexicon of the Peshitta translates
achyana as kinsman or cousin. Some Protestants, however, contend that because
Mark and Paul wrote their texts in Koine Greek, they would have incorporated
the Greek word for cousin, if in fact James and his brothers were cousins of
Jesus, seeing that there is such a word in the Greek language (ἀνεψιός/anepsios).
However, we should keep in
mind that the characters in Mark’s Gospel are themselves speaking in Aramaic,
and thus, as Palestinian Jews, would have used the idiom of their language that
served as a substitute. The evangelist wrote a literary work, and diction is a
literary device. And not unlike Paul, Mark was addressing an audience that
mostly consisted of Jewish converts to the Christian faith who were familiar
with the Semitic usage of the word brother. We know for a fact, moreover, that
the Semitic usage is preserved in Biblical Greek. Let us look at the
Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament, for our evidence.
The sons of Merari; Mooli, and Musi:
the sons of Mooli; Eleazar, and Kis. And Eleazar died, and
he had no sons, but
daughters: and the sons of Kis, their brethren (brothers), took them.
The sons
of Musi; Mooli, and Eder, and Jarimoth, three.
1 Chronicles 23, 21-23
υἱοὶ Μεραρί· Μοολὶ καὶ Μουσί. υἱοὶ Μοολί· ᾿Ελεάζαρ καὶ Κίς. καὶ ἀπέθανεν ᾿Ελεάζαρ,
καὶ οὐκ ἦσαν αὐτῷ υἱοί, ἀλλ᾿ ἢ θυγατέρες, καὶ ἔλαβον αὐτὰς υἱοὶ Κὶς ἀδελφοὶ αὐτῶν.
υἱοὶ Μουσί· Μοολὶ καὶ ᾿Εδὲρ καὶ ᾿Ιαριμώθ, τρεῖς.
Hence, the Greek word for
“brothers” (adelphos/ἀδελφοὶ : of the same womb)
is used in sacred Scripture about cousins in keeping with Hebrew
parlance. The daughters of Eleazar married the sons of his brother Kish. So,
all four men named in Mark’s Gospel were cousins of Jesus, which explains why
James, Jude (Judas/Thaddeus), and Simon (Canaanite/Zealot) are grouped and
paired together in the three lists of the Apostles in the synoptic Gospels. The
reason why Simon succeeded James the Less/Just as the Bishop of Jerusalem was
probably because they were either blood brothers or half-brothers and Apostles
of Jesus. Some scholars contend with good reason that Alphaeus and Clopas are
one and the same man, which would make the two uterine brothers. But one thing
is certain, and that is James, Joses, Jude, and Simon were not male siblings of
Jesus. These four men were definitely not “sons” of the Virgin Mary but of her
sister-in-law (achoth/adelphe) “the other Mary,” wife of Alphaeus/Clopas,
brother of Joseph.
Finally, for us to see with
greater certainty that the “brothers” and “sisters” mentioned in Mark’s gospel
are in fact cousins, we must continue to the following verse.
But Jesus said unto them, ‘A prophet
is not without honour, but in his own country,
and among his own kin (συγγενής, ές / suggenes), and in his own house.
Mark 6, 4
The plural Greek word used
refers to kinsfolk, relatives, or fellow countrymen. This same word is used by
Luke in his account of the Annunciation which in the singular form specifically
means “cousin” in this instance: “And, behold, thy cousin (συγγενίς / syngenis) Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old
age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren” (Luke 1:36). And so, Jesus
apparently replies with his cousins (relatives or kin) in mind in response to
what was said by those who were offended at him.
“Imitate her, holy mothers, who in
her only dearly beloved Son set forth
so great an example of maternal virtue; for neither have you sweeter children,
nor did the Virgin seek the consolation of being able to bear another son.”
St. Ambrose of Milan
To the Christian at Vercellae, Letter 63:111
(A.D. 396)
.png)
