The Time Came for Her to Be Delivered
Before she was in labor she gave birth;
before her pain came upon her she was delivered of a son.
Who ever heard of such a thing, or who ever saw the like?
Can a land be brought forth in one day,
or a nation be born in a single moment?
Yet Zion was scarcely in labor when she bore her children.
Shall I bring a mother to the point of birth,
and yet not let her child be born? says the LORD.
Or shall I who bring to birth yet close her womb?
says your God.
Isaiah 66, 7-9
And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth,
to Judea, to the city of
David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of
the house and lineage of David, to be
enrolled with Mary, his betrothed, who
was with child. And while they were there, the time
came for her to be
delivered. And she gave birth to her first-born son and wrapped him in
swaddling cloths, and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them
in the inn.
Luke 2, 4-7
The Perpetual
Virginity of Mary is one of the four Marian dogmas of the Catholic Church. Not
unlike the dogmas of the Immaculate Conception and Assumption of Mary, body and
soul into Heaven, this de fide doctrine derives its integrity from the first
Marian dogma of Mary being the Mother of God, in virtue of her first-born Son’s
divinity in his single-person hypostatically united with our humanity. Mary is
the mother of God or the Divine Logos incarnate (Isa. 7:14; Lk. 1:35, 43; Jn.
1:14; Col 2:9). So, the dogma of Mary ever-virgin basically holds that the
mother of our Lord remained a virgin her entire life in view of the Divine
Maternity, albeit her marriage with Joseph and the Jewish religious and
cultural norms of the time.
Mary was a virgin
when she conceived Jesus, during his birth, and after she gave birth to him.
Moreover, Catholics have always believed since the earliest time that Mary’s
union with the Holy Spirit was redolent of a marriage in a spiritual sense, as
the relationship between YHWH and Israel was, and thereby moral in nature. If
Mary chose to remain chaste her entire life and stay continent in her marriage
with her legal husband, whoever that might be, it was by the prompting of the
Holy Spirit at an early age, whose virgin spouse in a spiritual and mystical
sense she was chosen to be from all eternity (Lk. 1:35).
God willed that a
matrimonial type of covenant should exist between Him and His handmaid Mary
with all the dignity contained in the sacrament. It was becoming, therefore,
that a partnership, which reflected that of the whole of life and which was
ordered by its nature to the good of the spouses and the procreation of
offspring and nurturing them, should exist between the two. As a man and a
woman should become one flesh in the sacrament of Holy Matrimony to meet the
Divine purpose of consummating their marriage, so too should the Holy Spirit
and Mary become morally one in the spirit in their quasi-physical union in
accord with the Divine moral law for the same Divine purpose.
In a sense, through
the prompting of the Holy Spirit, God proposed to Mary when she was a young
girl living and serving in the Temple. He claimed her as his own virgin bride
and possession, not only so that they should beget the holy Child together, but
also that through their consummation they might beget all His children who
would be regenerated unto God by being reborn in the Spirit (Jn. 3:3; Rom.
8:29). All members of Christ’s Mystical Body are the only other children Mary
begot following the birth of her divine Son, who belong to the spiritual family
of God that transcends all blood ties in the natural world (Mk. 3:31-35) and
are the seed of the free promised woman (Gen. 3:15; Rev. 12:17).
By the influence of
divine grace, Mary must have felt compelled to remain chaste her entire life so
that she could devote herself to God entirely in body and spirit. Once she
became the mother of our Lord, she could focus all her attention on her divine
Son and, in union with God, raise and nurture him until it was time for his
public ministry to begin, on which occasion Mary’s motherhood would be
spiritually redefined and extended to all humanity and especially to all who
shall become Christ’s disciples (Jn. 2:3-8; 19:26-27).
Indeed, Mary had
consecrated herself to God when she was still a young girl without really
knowing all the implications that her sublime act involved. She could hardly
have imagined that she was predestined to be the mother of her Lord. Yet God
had preordained to single out His handmaid from fallen humanity and establish
His covenant with her, as He had with Israel before she was even conceived in
her mother’s womb. For this reason, God preserved Mary free from every stain of
original sin and its ill moral effects: concupiscence of the eyes, the
concupiscence of the flesh, and the pride of life. God sanctified Mary’s soul
at the first instant of her conception and endowed her with a perfect and
complete abundance of lasting grace (kecharitomene) so that she would be
worthiest of being the mother of His Only-begotten Son and the unblemished
bride of the Holy Spirit (Lk. 1:28). Her marriage covenant with God required a
shared moral and spiritual disposition which presupposed that she lives a
supernatural life of grace raised above the natural state of fallen humanity
(Lev. 20:26; Ezek. 16: 8-14).
St. Luke portrays
Mary as the antitupos of the pure and undefiled Ark of the Covenant by
referring to the Book of Exodus and the Second Book of Samuel among other Old
Testament texts. The Ark was so holy by Divine consecration, that if any common
man should touch it without first having had himself ritually purified, despite
any good intention, he would certainly die (2 Sam. 6:6-7). God sanctified the
Ark of the Covenant by His physical manifestation, as it was constructed by His
specifications to serve as His sacred dwelling place. Nothing profane was
permitted to touch it.
St. Thomas Aquinas
explains that Mary’s womb was a sacred shrine infused by the Holy Spirit (Shekinah)
and a personal dwelling place of God the Son made man, so it was unfitting that
this holy sanctuary of the Lord be used to gestate and bring forth common
sinful offspring by the tainted seed of man (Summa Theologica, lll, Q.28, a.
3.). As a devout Jew, Joseph must have revered Mary’s womb as much as he would
have revered the Ark and the Holy Temple in Jerusalem. Certainly, he wouldn’t
have dared enter the Holy of Holies. Mary’s sacred womb was God’s personal
sanctuary – not his “foot-stool” (Isa. 66:1).
Having conjugal
relations within the holy bond of matrimony isn’t sinful by any means. A
marriage blessed by God is intrinsically good, whereas pre-marital and
extra-marital sexual relations deeply offend Him by violating His will for what
is good for a man and a woman. A jewel chest is a good thing to have for one
who is in possession of many valuable jewels. But to put these jewels inside
the Ark of the Covenant for safekeeping would amount to sacrilege. Joseph knew
that he would not only have committed sacrilege but also adultery in a moral
sense if he had had marital intercourse with Mary and opened her womb with his
tainted seed after his wife had been overshadowed by the Holy Spirit and
conceived the holy Son of God by Him without opening her womb with tainted
seed.
Morally, Mary was
espoused to God as His virgin bride. She was “overshadowed” by “the power” or
authority (resuth) of the Most High God: a Hebrew euphemism for having
conjugal relations. Thus, Mary was under God’s rule and authority as a wife is
under her husband by Divine ordinance. As God’s spouse, she morally belonged
exclusively to Him, as Eve had under the rule or authority of her husband Adam
(Gen. 3:16).
And the angel of the Lord appeared to him
in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush;
and he looked, and lo, the bush was burning,
yet it was not consumed.
Exodus 3, 2
The Catholic dogma
of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary simply stated means that Our Blessed Lady
was “ever-virgin.” She was a virgin (virgo) before (ante-partum),
during (in partu), and after (post-partum) the birth of Jesus.
With respect to Mary being a virgin before and after the birth of Jesus, our
conventional understanding of the word virgin should come to mind. We take it
to mean that Mary had no sexual relations with her husband Joseph before and
after our Lord’s birth. However, when Catholics speak of Mary as having been a
virgin during the birth of Jesus, they don’t mean that she abstained from
having conjugal relations with her husband during the time of her pregnancy or
at the time of her Son’s birth.
Rather, what the
Catholic Church has traditionally believed and taught from the earliest time is
that when Mary gave birth to Jesus, her physical virginal integrity remained
intact. There was no breaking of the hymen, no physical pain or discomfort that
is normally experienced by a woman in labor, no issue of water and blood, and
no placenta and umbilical cord. Mary’s bodily integrity remained inviolate in
harmony with her chaste spiritual integrity. There was no profane element of
anything natural or any form of physical corruption in her giving birth to
Jesus that could violate the purity of her soul and her exemption from all
stain of original sin, nor anything wholly natural at all that could defile and
render impure her holy Child.
Both the Mother and
the Son were exempted from experiencing the corruption associated with original
sin. Thus, the birth of Jesus was as supernatural and miraculous as his
conception was by the power of the Holy Spirit. The entire creative process of
the Son of man proceeded from no seed (zera) of man who descended from
fallen Adam. So, all that was profane in the natural process of procreation,
from the time the male seed opens a woman’s womb to the time of the offspring’s
birth, as the result of Eve’s transgression and the fall of man, was kept at
bay by Divine intervention. The appointed time that Mary should be delivered
and give birth to her Son was ordained by God to be “before” she would naturally
go into physical labor.
The holy presence of
God in Mary’s sanctified womb couldn’t have defiled or violated her virginal
integrity in the least. Nor could her Divine offspring have been subjected to
the corrupt elements of the birth process because of sin, which would have
rendered him ritually impure for his presentation in the Temple and subject to
the ceremonial law of circumcision. The Virgin Mary was the bride of YHWH (the
Divine Bridegroom) in the flesh who had put His bride at enmity with the
serpent and all its works (Gen. 3:15). Both the Mother and the Son were blessed
(eulogeo) by sharing a single enmity (Lk. 1:42).
There is absolutely
no affinity between the sacred and the profane, or between the Divine holiness
and corruption itself in all its forms because of sin. The burning bush was
alight in flames but was not consumed and turned into ashes because of God’s
immediate presence. What God sanctifies merely by His presence cannot be
subject to putridity and corruption. Rather, it is made holy. Indeed, God
commanded Moses to remove the sandals from his feet before he could approach
the burning bush, for even the earth that surrounded it was made holy by God’s
physical manifestation (Ex. 3:5). The soil on the soles of his sandals was
implicitly declared to be impure since it hadn’t originated from a location
that was personally touched by the Divine presence. For the same reason, no Jew
could just simply walk into the Holy of Holies in the Temple without first
being ritually purified if he were the appointed High Priest.
The Divine Logos,
Jesus, sanctified his mother’s womb while He was present there, and He
preserved the sanctity of her body at the appointed time when the Father willed
that he be born. All forms of physical corruption in creation are the result of
Adam and Eve’s sin, by which they forfeited the original grace of holiness and
justice for humanity. The Blessed Virgin Mary was preserved free from every
stain of original sin by her Immaculate Conception. She was exempted,
therefore, from the law of sin that Eve brought down upon women because she was
chosen to be the mother of the Divine Messiah and Bridegroom (Gen. 3:16). Most
blessed was the mother of the Lord among women and equally blessed was the
fruit of her womb in his humanity.
The Virginitas In
Partu (virginity during birth) has belonged to the Apostolic Tradition of
the Catholic Church from the beginning. What the Church Fathers and Doctors of
the Church have taught about Mary’s virgin birth has been handed down by
faithful transmission (paradosis) from the Apostles through the oral
tradition. St. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyon, was a student of Bishop St. Polycarp
of Smyrna, who in turn was a disciple of the Apostle St. John, with whom Mary
lived the rest of her life until c. A.D. 48 (Jn. 19:27). This is what Irenaeus
(180-190 A.D.) has written as a living testimony to the Apostolic Faith: “The
Word will become flesh, and the Son of God the son of man—the Pure One opening
purely that pure womb, which generates men unto God.” [Against Heresies
4, 33, 12].
Meanwhile, in his
Gospel, John the Evangelist writes: ‘And the Word became flesh and dwelt (eskenosen)
among us, …’ (1:14). The root word for this Greek verb is skene which
means “tent” or “tabernacle, such as the portable tent or tabernacle that
housed the Ark of the Covenant until the First Temple was completely built by
David’s son, King Solomon. Where else, but in the most sacred womb of his
Blessed Mother did our Lord “tabernacle” himself among us? His blessed mother’s
womb was a holy sanctuary and personal dwelling place of God as sacred, if not
more, than the inner sanctuary of the Temple. God’s incarnation took place in
Mary’s womb by the power of the Holy Spirit. Mary’s husband Joseph could no
more open her womb with his tainted seed after the birth of Jesus than the High
Priest could enter the Temple sanctuary that housed the Ark but only once a
year on the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) or be struck dead. God’s
absolute personal holiness was not to be taken for granted.
Irenaeus certainly
knew his Isaiah very well, and so, in a Christian context, he could interpret
the verse as Messianic. He speaks of the Virgin Mary as being the anti-type of
Yahweh’s virgin bride, Daughter Zion, from whose blessed womb redeemed
offspring are born regenerated in the spirit unto God after having been
liberated from captivity in sin or Babylon. God shall suddenly and in an
unexpected manner come into the world through his virgin bride without
inflicting birth pangs and injury to the mother herself. He who is to come into
the world to heal humankind of the malady of sin shall not be the cause of the
effects of sin. Nor can he who offers himself as the only remedy for sin have
his mother, the new Eve, be made subject to what Eve wrought for all women by
her transgression. The Virgin Mary is the “most blessed” among women.
Further, Irenaeus
drew a perfect analogy between Adam and Jesus – the New Adam – to show the
Gnostics (who believed Jesus only appeared to be human in the flesh) how God
intended to redeem humanity in the most perfect manner; that is by way of
recapitulation, which required that the Redeemer be as much man as Adam was,
but not from tilled soil. So, to be fully human, the Divine Word had to
virginally receive his flesh and blood from a woman who provided untilled soil.
Up to the time of the Incarnation, Mary was that virgin, of whose untilled and
virgin flesh Jesus would be formed by the power of the Holy Spirit, just as God
had originally made Adam from untilled and virgin soil – not through paternal
tainted seed as Adam’s descendants would be after the fall.
Thus, Jesus was
fully God and fully man born of the Virgin Mary. Mary’s pure womb provided the
source of untilled virgin flesh her Son would take from her by his virginal
conception, for up to that time she had had no relations with Joseph, just as
the soil was still untilled and virginal at the time Adam was created before
the fall. Neither Adam nor Jesus had earthly fathers but, nevertheless, they
were both fully human. Jesus was no more an appearance of man than Adam was.
The implication here is that Mary couldn’t have begotten Jesus by naturally
going into painful labor, since her Son wasn’t conceived in sin by the seed of
man. Both Mary’s conception and the birth of Jesus were virginal. [cf. Against
Heresies 3: 21.10: A Vindication of the Prophecy in Isaiah (VII. 14)
Against the Misinterpretations of Theodotion, Aquila, the Ebionites, and the
Jews. Authority of the Septuagint Version; arguments in Proof that Christ Was
Born of a Virgin].
Then he brought me back to the outer gate of the sanctuary,
facing the
east; but it was closed. He said to me: “This gate is to remain closed;
it is not to be opened for anyone to enter by it; since the Lord, the God
of Israel, has entered by it, it shall remain closed.”
Ezekiel 44, 1- 3
The Universal
Magisterium of the Catholic Church has infallibly defined as a de fide doctrine
that “at the appropriate time, Jesus left his mother’s womb through the natural
channels, but in a miraculous way, just as he had entered it without the least
diminution of her virginal integrity” (Lumen Gentium, 57). Jesus was
born without in any way opening his mother’s womb, just as the Holy Spirit had
overshadowed Mary without opening it. In other words, there was no dilation of
the birth canal, no opening of the vagina, and no breaking of the virginal
hymen. Jesus passed through the birth canal and entered the world like he had
entered the room where his disciples were gathered with the doors locked (Jn.
20:19).
In defense of the
miraculous and painless birth of Christ, St. Thomas Aquinas drew the analogy of
light passing through glass without damaging it (Summa Theologica, III,
Q. 28, a. 2.). With this imagery in mind, he argued that Jesus passed through
his mother’s womb without opening it and without any harm to her physical
virginal seal. This was only fitting because Mary was the pure and perfect
tabernacle of Christ, who was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit. The
birth of her Son ought to have been an experience that drew her into closer
spiritual communion with God rather than one that could have momentarily
distanced her soul from God because of physical distress. St. Augustine
contended that he who was the light of the world and “came to heal corruption”
should not “by his advent violate integrity” (Sermon 189).
Jesus came into the
world to redeem and re-create humankind (Adam) and renew the state of the
world. His mother’s pure womb was his first work of re-creation in the physical
order. The miracle was an eschatological sign of the restoration and renewal of
creation with the coming of the Messiah: a long-awaited hope of the Jews.
Therefore, it was fitting that his mother’s virginal integrity be preserved
intact and he is born in new conditions raised above the state of fallen
humanity and creation.
.webp)
St. Cyril of
Jerusalem (350 A.D.) implicitly taught that Mary’s virginal integrity remained
inviolate when she brought forth her divine Son. He writes in his Catechetical
Lecture Xll.25: “For it became Him who is most pure, and a teacher of
purity, to have come forth from a pure bride-chamber.” Clearly, the pure
bride-chamber refers to Mary’s moral union with the Holy Spirit in begetting
Christ together free from the taint of sin. In the same lecture, he speaks of
Mary’s virginity and chastity as finding its culmination during the nine months
she carried Jesus in her womb. The height of Mary’s spiritual and bodily purity
was reached when God became incarnate in her womb and sanctified it with His
presence, as much as His theophanies sanctified the tabernacle of the Ark and
the Temple in Jerusalem. We can recall how grievously Jesus reacted to the
mercenary activities of the merchants and money changers in the Temple
precincts (Mt. 21:12-13).
The Divine Maternity
was Mary’s singular and personal glory because of her virginal state, the
purity of her body, and her soul. And this glory of hers should always last for
her to be the worthy Mother of our Lord. She had to be perpetually chaste and preserved
free from all forms of the taint of sin and corruption to be the worthiest of
all mothers for our Lord. Mary’s purity in body and soul had to completely
conform to the inviolate purity of her Son (the new Adam) in the fullness of
his humanity.
Mary was
overshadowed by the Holy Spirit. She was God’s virginal bride. Jesus came forth
from “a pure bridal chamber” exempted from putridity and corruption. Mary was
God’s virginal and “holy bride” whose “nuptial pledges” were made to Him in
their marriage covenant. The glory of Mary’s chastity would have been
extinguished if she had given birth to Jesus in the natural way as all women do
by the seed of sinful man. Cyril acknowledged two essential things about Mary:
She was the “Virgin Mother of God” and she was God’s “holy bride” throughout
her life, being the mother of His Divine Son. In verse 32 of Lecture Xll, Cyril
states that our Lord’s “birth was pure, undefiled” which indicates he believed,
along with the other Church Fathers and Doctors who explicitly taught the
Virginitas In Partu, that Mary’s physical virginal integrity continued beyond
the miraculous conception of Jesus and the months she had held him in her
sacred womb. Mary was ever-virgin.
Therefore, the Lord himself shall give you a
sign: the virgin shall conceive, and bear a son,
and shall call his name Immanuel: God with us.
Isaiah 7, 14
And while they were there,
the time came for her to be delivered.
Luke 2, 6
That Jesus would be
born miraculously, just as he had been conceived by the will of God, and Mary
remain a virgin during the birth of Jesus, was foretold by the prophet Isaiah:
‘Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; behold, a virgin shall
“conceive” (παρθένος) in the womb, and shall “bring forth” (τέξεται) a son, and
thou shalt call his name Emmanuel.’ (7:14). This passage from the Septuagint is
a Greek translation of the Hebrew OT. The Hebrew word harah can mean either
conceive (become pregnant) or be pregnant (be with child). Isaiah means “to
become pregnant”. The Septuagint, which Matthew cites in his gospel (1:23) to
show that Joseph wasn’t Jesus’ real father, verifies this. The meaning of the
Greek word εννοώ is “to conceive” strictly in the sense of “becoming pregnant”
or “cause to be pregnant.”
Since virgins do not
naturally conceive offspring, it follows that the prophet is speaking of a
supernatural conception. Included with Mary’s virginal conception of Jesus is
her virginal act of giving birth to him, which virgins naturally don’t give.
Isaiah says that a virgin shall “bring forth a son.” The Greek word τέξεται
(“bring forth” or “cause to be born”) is translated from וֹי ל דת (u·ildth: literally
“one giving birth”), which is the intended meaning of the verb “to bear” (yalad)
in the Hebrew OT. Hence, this verse must do with two miraculous events: the
conception and birth of Jesus. The conception of Jesus was virginal since
Mary’s womb hadn’t been opened by the seed of man. The act of Mary giving birth
was virginal since Christ hadn’t opened his mother’s womb when he was born.
Mary was a virgin at the time of Christ’s birth as well as at his conception.
This is confirmed by another Zion prophecy of Isaiah (66:7): ‘Before she
travailed (tahil), she brought forth (ya-la-dah); before her pain
came, she was delivered of a man child. It appears Luke confirms what God has
intended to fully reveal through the words of the prophet.
What Isaiah says in
7:14 about the Virgin Birth reflects what God intends to reveal in 66:7: Mary’s
virginal integrity is never violated on either occasion, neither when she
conceives Jesus nor when she gives birth to her Divine Son. We read in the
English version of the Septuagint – the Greek translation from Hebrew: ‘Before
she that travailed brought forth, before the travail-pain came on, she escaped
it and brought forth a male.’ (Isaiah 66:7). The original Hebrew expression for
“she was delivered” is malat (maw-lat’), also meaning “she escaped it”
as we have in the Greek translation. The above passage sheds light on the full
meaning and implications of the Hebrew phrase חֵ֛בֶללָ֖הּ וְהִמְלִ֥יטָה זָכָֽר׃ (she was delivered)
in Isaiah 66:7 found in the Masoretic Text. The Virgin Mary escaped the
experience of having to go into labor before giving birth, as all mothers
ordinarily must, by Divine deliverance. She didn’t deliver her child (active
voice) but was delivered (passive voice) of her child at God’s appointed time
and by His intervention.
Any woman who has
given or gives birth (active voice) is delivered from or has been released from
the travails of the act of childbirth (passive voice). She causes this release
or escapes from travail by giving birth. So, what the Hebrew phrase implies is
that Mary has escaped from going into labor and experiencing pain before she
should when giving birth. The Alexandrian Jews who translated Hebrew into Greek
understood the connotations of this expression. Thus, we have: “she escaped it
and brought forth.” The woman is the physical cause of giving birth (active
voice), but God’s intervention is the cause of when she shall give birth – that
is before she goes into labor and is delivered from the natural pangs of
childbirth (passive voice).
Mary miraculously gives birth to the male child by Divine intervention. God releases her from the prospect of going into labor and experiencing the pangs of childbirth, which she can have no control over and is unable to escape from causatively until she gives birth unless God causes her to give birth beforehand. Moreover, the Hiphil stem can be used to express a causative type of action with an active voice. It is causative of the Qal stem of a verb. In other words, the subject causes the action of the verb, but the subject does not directly perform the act. In many instances, we can take the Qal form of the verb and precede it with ‘to cause to’ or ‘to make to’. For example: ‘David reigned over Israel’ (Qal stem with David as the subject of the verb); ‘God caused David to reign over Israel’ (Hiphil stem of the same verb with God as the subject).
Mary, therefore,
causes the action of giving birth, but she does not directly perform the action
of giving birth before her time comes. It is God who directly performs or
causes the act of her giving birth before she goes into labor and experiences
pain. It is by a miracle and Divine intervention that the Virgin shall not only
conceive by no seed of man but also give birth to a Son with her womb unopened
like a gate that must remain shut, that is before she naturally goes into labor
and her pains set in. Not even the Prince of peace shall open it, let alone any
offspring of Joseph, so Ezekiel prophesies. The Virgin neither conceives nor
bears a Son in a completely natural or normal way. Isaiah’s sign points to a
miracle that comprises the entire process of procreation from conception to
birth, which points to the divinity of the coming Messiah King who shall
inherit the throne of his father David and restore his royal dynasty. The
Blessed Virgin Mary is the trigger sign or "great sign in heaven" of this eternal
restoration (Rev. 12).
In the first half of
the 5th century, the great doctrinal controversies in the Christian world all
revolved around the hypostatic union of the divine and human natures of Christ
and how Christ’s divinity and humanity were related in him. The Council of Chalcedon
presents us with the definitive dogmatic resolution to these controversies,
which holds even today as the profession of the Catholic Church’s faith. The
basis for this conciliar definition was a letter that Pope Leo I sent in
advance to the Patriarch of Constantinople. Pope Leo’s letter, commonly known
as the Tome of Leo, was originally written in Latin in 449 A.D. but was
translated into Greek for use at the Council of Chalcedon in 451.
The following
excerpt is the English translation from the Greek text since the Conciliar
Greek text is more authoritative than the Latin one. The Tome is primarily
Christological in its topic, but the Church’s profession of faith in Mary being
“Ever-Virgin” is equally ratified, though secondary in importance with respect
to the dogma of the Incarnation. The words in the Tome of Pope St. Leo the
Great include: “He was conceived from the Holy Spirit inside the womb of the
virgin mother. Her virginity was as untouched in giving him birth as it was in
conceiving him. So, without leaving his Father’s glory behind, the Son of God
comes down from his heavenly throne and enters the depths of our world, born in
an unprecedented order by an unprecedented kind of birth.”
.jpg)
I will declare the decree:
the LORD hath said unto me,
Thou art my Son;
this day have I begotten thee.
Psalm 2, 7
Early Sacred Tradition
was in labor gave birth, and before the birth-pains came on, she was delivered of a male
child’ (Isaiah 66:7). Thus, he indicated His unexpected and extraordinary birth from the Virgin.”
St. Irenaeus of Lungdunum
Proof of the Apostolic Preaching, 54
(A.D. 190)
.webp)
the primeval curse? If Mary was ‘blessed of women’ [Luke 1:42], she would have been exempt
from the curse from the beginning, and from the bearing of children in birth-pangs and
curses.”
St. Ephrem of Syria
Commentary on the Diatesseron, 2.6
(ante A.D. 373)
.webp)
through successive births, only Jesus came to light through a new way of being born… In fact,
his birth alone occurred without labor pains, and he alone began to exist without sexual
relations… Even the prophet Isaiah affirms that her giving birth was without pain, when he
says, ‘Before the pangs of birth arrived, a male child came forth and was born’
(Isa 66:7).”
St. Gregory of Nyssa,
On the Song of Songs 13
(ante A.D. 376)
.png)
Salve Regina!