Jerome wrote a response to Helvidius regarding the virginity of Mary. This post is the fifth in a series of responses to what Jerome wrote.
Jerome wrote:
This, however, is a point which will find its proper place further on. We must now hasten to other matters. The passage for discussion now is, “And Joseph arose from his sleep, and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took unto him his wife and knew her not till she had brought forth a son, and he called his name Jesus.” Here, first of all, it is quite needless for our opponent to show so elaborately that the word know has reference to coition, rather than to intellectual apprehension: as though anyone denied it, or any person in his senses could ever imagine the folly which Helvidius takes pains to refute. Then he would teach us that the adverb till implies a fixed and definite time, and when that is fulfilled, he says the event takes place which previously did not take place, as in the case before us, “and knew her not till she had brought forth a son.” It is clear, says he, that she was known after she brought forth, and that that knowledge was only delayed by her engendering a son. To defend his position he piles up text upon text, waves his sword like a blind-folded gladiator, rattles his noisy tongue, and ends with wounding no one but himself.
Helvidius may overprove his points, but he's not wrong. Jerome has lovely rhetoric here, but Helvidius has correctly understood the meaning of the text. Joseph waited to know Mary until after Jesus was born. I obviously can't say whether anyone argued that to "know" Mary didn't mean what we all know it meant, and even Jerome admits, but it seems Helvidius must have proved this point at great length, as one could.
-TurretinFan
No comments:
Post a Comment