Virgindade perpétua de Maria: diferenças entre revisões

▲Another view, expressed by [[Eusebius of Caesarea|Eusebius]] and [[Epiphanius of Salamis|Epiphanius]], is that they were children of Joseph by an earlier marriage.<ref name=ODCC/> A modern view is that they were children of Cleopas, a brother of Joseph according to Hegesippus, and of "[[Mary of Clopas|Mary]], the mother of James and Joses" seen as sister-in-law, not blood sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus.<ref name=ODCC/> The 1978 book ''Mary in the New Testament: A Collaborative Assessment by Protestant and Roman Catholic Scholars''<ref>[[Raymond E. Brown]], Karl P. Donfried, [[Joseph Fitzmyer]] and John Reumann ed., Philadelphia: Fortress Press, and Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1978</ref> concluded that "it cannot be said that the New Testament identifies them (the "brothers and sisters" of Jesus) without doubt as blood brothers and sisters and hence as children of Mary".<ref>[http://campus.udayton.edu/mary/Rossier.html François Rossier: The "Brothers and Sisters" of Jesus: Anything New?]</ref>

▲{{bibleverse||Matthew|1:25}} states that Joseph had no marital relations with Mary "until" (ἕως οὗ ) she had borne Jesus. Writers such as R.V. Tasker<ref>Tasker, R.V., ''The Gospel according to Saint Matthew'' (InterVarsity Press 1961), p. 36</ref> and D. Hill<ref>Hill D., The Gospel of Matthew, p80 (1972) Marshall, Morgan and Scott:London</ref> argue that this implies that Mary and Joseph had customary marital relations after the birth of Jesus. Others, such as K. Beyer, point out that Greek ἕως οὗ after a negative "often has no implication at all about what happened after the limit of the 'until' was reached",<ref name=Brown132>[http://books.google.com/books?ei=2WBjTsXVCMLG8QPs0rmQCg&ct=result&id=Dd1XAAAAYAAJ&dq=brown+birth+messiah&q=implication#search_anchor Raymond E. Brown, ''The Birth of the Messiah'' (Doubleday 1999 ISBN 978-0-385-49447-2), p. 132]</ref> and [[Raymond E. Brown]] observes that "the immediate context favors a lack of future implication here, for Matthew is concerned only with stressing Mary's virginity before the child's birth".<ref name=Brown132/>

▲A passage used to support the doctrine of perpetual virginity is of the [[sayings of Jesus on the cross]], i.e. the pair of commands first to his mother "Woman, behold your son!" and then to his disciple "Behold, thy mother!" in [[wikisource:Bible (American Standard)/John#19:26|John 19:26-27]].<ref name=Burke308 /><ref name=Miravalle62 /><ref name=KBaker334 >''Fundamentals of Catholicism'' by Kenneth Baker 1983 ISBN 0-89870-019-1 pages 334-335</ref> The [[Gospel of John]] then states that "from that hour the disciple took her unto his own home". Since the time of the [[Church Fathers]] this statement has been used to reason that after the death of Jesus there was no one else in the immediate family to look after Mary, and she had to be entrusted to the disciple given that she had no other children.<ref name=Burke308 /><ref name=Miravalle62 /><ref name=KBaker334 /> This passage was one of the arguments [[Pope John Paul II]] presented in support of perpetual virginity.<ref name=Miravalle62 /><ref>Pope John Paul II's General Audience of 28 August 1996, printed in ''[[L'Osservatore Romano]]'', Weekly Edition in English, 4 September 1996 [http://www.ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp960828.htm The article at EWTN]</ref><ref>[http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/audiences/1996/documents/hf_jp-ii_aud_19960828_it.html Vatican website: ''Pope John Paul II's General Audience of 28 August 1996'' (in Italian)]</ref> John Paul II also reasoned that the command "Behold your son!" was not simply the entrustment of Mary to the disciple, but also the entrustment of the disciple to Mary in order to fill the maternal gap left by the death of her only son on the cross.<ref>''[[L'Osservatore Romano]]'', Weekly Edition in English, 30 April 1997, page 11 [http://www.ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2bvm49.htm Article at EWTN]</ref><ref>[http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/audiences/1997/documents/hf_jp-ii_aud_23041997_en.html Vatican website: ''Pope John Paul II's General Audience of 28 April 1997''] reprinted in ''[[L'Osservatore Romano]]'', Weekly Edition in English, 30 April 1997, page 11</ref>

▲In [[Sura]] 19,<ref>[[s:The Holy Qur'an/Maryam|The Holy Qur'an: Maryam (Mary), Sura 19 (Translation by A. Yusuf Ali)]]</ref> the [[Qur'an]] declares that Jesus was the result of a virgin conception (verses 20-22), and some extend this to mean perpetual virginity of Mary.<ref name=Emir >''The Truth about Islam & Jesus'' by John Ankerberg, Emir Caner 2009 ISBN 0-7369-2502-3 page 65 [http://books.google.com/books?id=-XgH1R2AhbgC&pg=PA65&dq=%22Perpetual+virginity%22+of+Mary+islam&hl=en&ei=0oVcTonHAs7DtAaN56G6Dw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CD8Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=%22Perpetual%20virginity%22%20of%20Mary%20islam&f=false]</ref><ref>''What Every Catholic Should Know about Mary'' by Terrence J. McNally 2009 ISBN 1-4415-1051-6 page 161 [http://books.google.com/books?id=IlJRXgcBVvoC&pg=PA161&dq=Perpetual+virginity+of+Mary+islam&hl=en&ei=n4VcTsLwB8vfsga65enPDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=Perpetual%20virginity%20of%20Mary%20islam&f=false]</ref> There is no clear doctrinal belief one way or another as to whether she retained her virginity after Jesus' birth.<ref>''Women in the Qur'ān, traditions, and interpretation'' by Barbara Freyer Stowasser. Oxford University Press: 1994, pp. 78-70, 163.</ref><ref>"The Virgin Mary in Islamic tradition and commentary" by J. I. Smith et. al., published in the ''Muslim World'' (Hartford, Conn.) v. 79 (July/October 1989) p. 161-87</ref>