The so-called CONTESTED TERTULLIAN TEXTS

Excerpt from: The Definitive Guide to Mary’s Perpetual Virginity in the Holy Bible

Rev. Dr. Christiaan Kappes and William Albrëcht

The following set of three texts from Tertullian are said to be strong evidence that he was an early Christian witness against the perpetual virginity of Saint Mary. What must be noted is that each of the three texts were written when Tertullian was no longer a part of the Church and had visibly apostatized to join the prophetic cult of Montanism. Let us first look at each set of texts and see if the virgin-deniers have a solid case to claim that Tertullian denied Holy Mary’s perpetual virginity.

“Virgin because she abstained from man; non-virgin because she gave birth. . . . Virgin when she conceived, she became a wife when she gave birth. . . . Who really opened her maternal womb, if not the one who opened the womb that had been closed [in his conception]? Normally, conjugal relations open the womb. Therefore [Mary’s] womb was all the more opened, since it had been more closed. Consequently it is more accurate to call her non-virgin, than virgin.” De Carne Christi 23

Analysis: As the majority of scholars note, there is nothing here. Tertullian is merely noting that the prophecy of Isaiah 7 is fulfilled in the virgin birth. He even notes that normally conjugal relations open the womb, but this is a supernatural case. There is no claim that Mary had other children nor is there any evidence that Mary had relations with Joseph.

Our second text is perhaps the most contested one in his corpus. We will find that even in this text there is not much other than Tertullian noting a clear blood relationship between the brothers and Christ.

“And therefore, when to the previous question, Who is my mother, and who are my brethren? He added the answer None but they who hear my words and do them, He transferred the names of blood-relationship to others, whom He judged to be more closely related to Him by reason of their faith. Now no one transfers a thing except from him who possesses that which is transferred. If, therefore, He made them His mother and His brethren who were not so, how could He deny them these relationships who really had them? Surely only on the condition of their deserts, and not by any disavowal of His near relatives; teaching them by His own actual example, that whosoever preferred father or mother or brethren to the Word of God, was not a disciple worthy of Him. Matthew 10:37 Besides, His admission of His mother and His brethren was the more express, from the fact of His unwillingness to acknowledge them. That He adopted others only confirmed those in their relationship to Him whom He refused because of their offense, and for whom He substituted the others, not as being truer relatives, but worthier ones. Finally, it was no great matter if He did prefer to kindred (that) faith which it did not possess.” Contra Marcion 4:19

Analysis: Tertullian quotes from the gospels in noting that these figure are indeed brothers of Christ. Apart from this, there is no clear cut claim that they are children of Joseph. There is an even weaker claim that people make it claiming that since he notes they are “blood” related they must be children of Mary. But Tertullian merely quotes the Gospel account which calls them brothers. He never claims they are children of Mary and Joseph from sexual relations. Furthermore, when he calls them “near relatives” he injects even more ambiguity into exactly how they are related. As scholars have pored over the Latin, they have noted that the very Latin text itself is ambiguous in identifying them as near kinsmen. All that we can conclude here is that they are related to Christ in some way, but there is simply nothing here in identifying them as children of Saint Mary.

Our third and final text comes from De Monogamia:

“Behold, there immediately present themselves to us, on the threshold as it were, the two priestesses of Christian sanctity, Monogamy and Continence: one modest, in Zechariah the priest; one absolute, in John the forerunner: one appeasing God; one preaching Christ: one proclaiming a perfect priest; one exhibiting more than a prophet, — him, namely, who has not only preached or personally pointed out, but even baptized Christ. For who was more worthily to perform the initiatory rite on the body of the Lord, than flesh similar in kind to that which conceived and gave birth to that (body)? And indeed it was a virgin, about to marry once for all after her delivery, who gave birth to Christ, in order that each title of sanctity might be fulfilled in Christ’s parentage, by means of a mother who was both virgin, and wife of one husband. She was a virgin who gave birth to Christ, but after his birth she was married to one man, so that both ideals of holiness [namely, the virginal ideal and the married ideal] might be exemplified in the parentage of Christ, in the person of a mother who was both virgin and married to one husband only.” De Monogamia 8:2

Analysis: A clear examination of De Monogamia does not indicate that Mary either had relations with Joseph or even had other children. The whole message of De Monogamia is an emphasis on two paths: monogamia or continentia

Tertullian has a clear emphasis on continentia, remaining abstinent, and not on virginitas. It was the liberal scholar Father Meier who made the claim that people cannot remain perpetually continent, so relations and children must have come forward at a future time. But there is no indication of such in this text of Tertullian. In fact, as scholar Dr. Perdozo notes, Tertullian draws the parallel with John the Baptist and Saint Mary in terms of continence. The parallel is not pushed with Zechariah the priest. Notice how Tertullian notes:

“him, namely, who has not only preached or personally pointed out, but even baptized Christ.

For who was more worthily to perform the initiatory rite on the body of the Lord, than flesh similar in kind to that which conceived and gave birth to that (body)? And indeed it was a virgin, about to marry once for all after her delivery, who gave birth to Christ, in order that each title of sanctity might be fulfilled in Christ’s parentage, by means of a mother who was both virgin, and wife of one husband.”

On Monogamy draws the comparison of Saint Mary to John the Baptist-both were ideals of CONTINENCE (sexual abstinence)

If one wants to truly push the parallels, a stronger case can be made for Tertullian implying Saint Mary’s continence than her actually having any children. This work is also the final one in the order of his corpus. The strongest case can be made that Tertullian’s final word on this case was one in which his implication is that of Saint Mary being married and being a virgin. His final words on the matter are that Mary was an example of one:  “..who was both virgin and married to one husband only.”

Below is a timeline of the numbering of Tertullian’s writings during his lifetime. Scholars number the writings in this order. All fall under the banner of his Montanist apostasy:

Montanist apostasy

27^th work written  De Carne Christi (On the Flesh of Christ)

29^th work  written Adversus Marcionem, lib V

36^th work written De Monogamia (On Monogamy)

In conclusion:

There truly is nothing strong in Tertullian that one can latch onto to claim that he believed Holy Mary had other children. A stronger case could be made that Tertullian’s ambiguity in his 29^th work is clarified in his final word on the matter in De Monogamia. His final word on the matter is one in which his parallel is drawn between John the Baptist and Saint Mary in terms of continence.  Remember he calls Mary “both” virgin and married to Saint Joseph. Those are rather powerful if one wants to compare the parallels that are drawn. Whatever conclusion one may come to in terms of Tertullian, we have sufficiently shown that there is simply nothing in his texts to draw one to believe that Mary had other children after the birth of our Lord.

FURTHER READING

PROTESTANT SCHOLAR ON MARY’S VIRGINITY IN THE EARLY CHURCH

FRANCIS TURRETIN ON THE PERPETUAL VIRGINITY OF MARY

THE REFORMERS ON MARY’S PERPETUAL VIRGINITY

What the Early Church Believed: The Perpetual Virginity of Mary

• Uncategorized