Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae

Objection 1: It would seem that Christ should not have been born of an espoused virgin. For espousals are ordered to carnal intercourse. But our Lord's Mother never wished to have carnal intercourse with her husband; because this would be derogatory to the virginity of her mind. Therefore she should not have been espoused.

Objection 2: Further, that Christ was born of a virgin was miraculous, whence Augustine says (Ep. ad Volus. cxxxvii): "This same power of God brought forth the infant's limbs out of the virginal womb of His inviolate Mother, by which in the vigor of manhood He passed through the closed doors. If we are told why this happened, it will cease to be wonderful; if another instance be alleged, it will no longer be unique." But miracles that are wrought in confirmation of the Faith should be manifest. Since, therefore, by her Espousals this miracle would be less evident, it seems that it was unfitting that Christ should be born of an espoused virgin.

Objection 3: Further, the martyr Ignatius, as Jerome says on Mt. 1:18, gives as a reason of the espousals of the Mother of God, "that the manner of His Birth might be hidden from the devil, who would think Him to be begotten not of a virgin but of a wife." But this seems to be no reason at all. First, because by his natural cunning he knows whatever takes place in bodies. Secondly, because later on the demons, through many evident signs, knew Christ after a fashion: whence it is written (Mk. 1:23,24): "A man with an unclean spirit . . . cried out, saying: What have we to do with Thee, Jesus of Nazareth? Art Thou come to destroy us? I know . . . Thou art the Holy one of God." Therefore it does not seem fitting that the Mother of God should have been espoused.

Objection 4: Further, Jerome gives as another reason, "lest the Mother of God should be stoned by the Jews as an adulteress." But this reason seems to have no weight, for if she were not espoused, she could not be condemned for adultery. Therefore it does not seem reasonable that Christ should be born of an espoused virgin.

On the contrary, It is written (Mt. 1:18): "When as His Mother Mary was espoused to Joseph": and (Lk. 1:26,27): "The angel Gabriel was sent . . . to a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph."

I answer that, It was fitting that Christ should be born of an espoused virgin; first, for His own sake; secondly, for His Mother's sake; thirdly, for our sake. For the sake of Christ Himself, for four reasons. First, lest He should be rejected by unbelievers as illegitimate: wherefore Ambrose says on Lk. 1:26,27: "How could we blame Herod or the Jews if they seem to persecute one who was born of adultery?"

Secondly, in order that in the customary way His genealogy might be traced through the male line. Thus Ambrose says on Lk. 3:23: "He Who came into the world, according to the custom of the world had to be enrolled Now for this purpose, it is the men that are required, because they represent the family in the senate and other courts. The custom of the Scriptures, too, shows that the ancestry of the men is always traced out."

Thirdly, for the safety of the new-born Child: lest the devil should plot serious hurt against Him. Hence Ignatius says that she was espoused "that the manner of His Birth might be hidden from the devil."

Fourthly, that He might be fostered by Joseph: who is therefore called His "father," as bread-winner.

It was also fitting for the sake of the Virgin. First, because thus she was rendered exempt from punishment; that is, "lest she should be stoned by the Jews as an adulteress," as Jerome says.

Secondly, that thus she might be safeguarded from ill fame. Whence Ambrose says on Lk. 1:26,27: "She was espoused lest she be wounded by the ill-fame of violated virginity, in whom the pregnant womb would betoken corruption."

Thirdly, that, as Jerome says, Joseph might administer to her wants.

This was fitting, again, for our sake. First, because Joseph is thus a witness to Christ's being born of a virgin. Wherefore Ambrose says: "Her husband is the more trustworthy witness of her purity, in that he would deplore the dishonor, and avenge the disgrace, were it not that he acknowledged the mystery."

Secondly, because thereby the very words of the Virgin are rendered more credible by which she asserted her virginity. Thus Ambrose says: "Belief in Mary's words is strengthened, the motive for a lie is removed. If she had not been espoused when pregnant, she would seem to have wished to hide her sin by a lie: being espoused, she had no motive for lying, since a woman's pregnancy is the reward of marriage and gives grace to the nuptial bond." These two reasons add strength to our faith.

Thirdly, that all excuse be removed from those virgins who, through want of caution, fall into dishonor. Hence Ambrose says: "It was not becoming that virgins should expose themselves to evil report, and cover themselves with the excuse that the Mother of the Lord had also been oppressed by ill-fame."

Fourthly, because by this the universal Church is typified, which is a virgin and yet is espoused to one Man, Christ, as Augustine says (De Sanct. Virg. xii).

A fifth reason may be added: since the Mother of the Lord being both espoused and a virgin, both virginity and wedlock are honored in her person, in contradiction to those heretics who disparaged one or the other.

Reply to Objection 1: We must believe that the Blessed Virgin, Mother of God, desired, from an intimate inspiration of the Holy Ghost, to be espoused, being confident that by the help of God she would never come to have carnal intercourse: yet she left this to God's discretion. Wherefore she suffered nothing in detriment to her virginity.

Reply to Objection 2: As Ambrose says on Lk. 1:26: "Our Lord preferred that men should doubt of His origin rather than of His Mother's purity. For he knew the delicacy of virgin modesty, and how easily the fair name of chastity is disparaged: nor did He choose that our faith in His Birth should be strengthened in detriment to His Mother." We must observe, however, that some miracles wrought by God are the direct object of faith; such are the miracles of the virginal Birth, the Resurrection of our Lord, and the Sacrament of the Altar. Wherefore our Lord wished these to be more hidden, that belief in them might have greater merit. Whereas other miracles are for the strengthening of faith: and these it behooves to be manifest.

Reply to Objection 3: As Augustine says (De Trin. iii), the devil can do many things by his natural power which he is hindered by the Divine power from doing. Thus it may be that by his natural power the devil could know that the Mother of God knew not man, but was a virgin; yet was prevented by God from knowing the manner of the Divine Birth. That afterwards the devil after a fashion knew that He was the Son of God, makes no difficulty: because then the time had already come for Christ to make known His power against the devil, and to suffer persecution aroused by him. But during His infancy it behooved the malice of the devil to be withheld, lest he should persecute Him too severely: for Christ did not wish to suffer such things then, nor to make His power known, but to show Himself to be in all things like other infants. Hence Pope Leo (Serm. in Epiph. iv) says that "the Magi found the Child Jesus small in body, dependent on others, unable to speak, and in no way differing from the generality of human infants." Ambrose, however, expounding Lk. 1:26, seems to understand this of the devil's members. For, after giving the above reason---namely, that the prince of the world might be deceived---he continues thus: "Yet still more did He deceive the princes of the world, since the evil disposition of the demons easily discovers even hidden things: but those who spend their lives in worldly vanities can have no acquaintance of Divine things."

Reply to Objection 4: The sentence of adulteresses according to the Law was that they should be stoned, not only if they were already espoused or married, but also if their maidenhood were still under the protection of the paternal roof, until the day when they enter the married state. Thus it is written (Dt. 22:20,21): "If . . . virginity be not found in the damsel . . . the men of the city shall stone her to death, and she shall die; because she hath done a wicked thing in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house."

It may also be said, according to some writers, that the Blessed Virgin was of the family or kindred of Aaron, so that she was related to Elizabeth, as we are told (Lk. 1:36). Now a virgin of the priestly tribe was condemned to death for whoredom; for we read (Lev. 21:9): "If the daughter of a priest be taken in whoredom, and dishonor the name of her father, she shall be burnt with fire."

Lastly, some understand the passage of Jerome to refer to the throwing of stones by ill-fame.

Articulus 1

Argumentum 1

Ad primum sic proceditur. Videtur quod christus non debuerit de virgine desponsata nasci. Desponsatio enim ad carnalem copulam ordinatur. Sed mater domini nunquam voluit carnali viri copula uti, quia hoc derogaret virginitati mentis ipsius.

Ergo non debuit esse desponsata.

Argumentum 2

Praeterea, quod christus ex virgine nasceretur, miraculum fuit, unde Augustinus dicit, in epistola ad volusianum, ipsa dei virtus per inviolata matris virginea viscera membra infantis eduxit, quae per clausa Ostia membra iuvenis introduxit. Huius si ratio quaeritur, non erit mirabile, si exemplum poscitur, non erit singulare.

Sed miracula, quae fiunt ad confirmationem fidei, debent esse manifesta. Cum igitur per desponsationem hoc miraculum fuerit obumbratum, videtur non fuisse conveniens quod christus de desponsata nasceretur.

Argumentum 3

Praeterea, ignatius martyr, ut dicit Hieronymus, super Matth., hanc causam assignat desponsationis matris dei, ut partus eius celaretur diabolo, dum eum putat non de virgine, sed de uxore generatum.

Quae quidem causa nulla esse videtur.

Tum quia diabolus ea quae corporaliter fiunt perspicacitate sensus cognoscit. Tum quia per multa evidentia signa postmodum Daemones aliqualiter christum cognoverunt, unde dicitur Marc. I, quod homo in spiritu immundo exclamavit, dicens, quid nobis et tibi, iesu Nazarene? venisti perdere nos? scio quia sis sanctus dei.

Non ergo videtur conveniens fuisse quod mater dei fuisset desponsata.

Argumentum 4

Praeterea, aliam rationem assignat Hieronymus, ne lapidaretur mater dei a Iudaeis sicut adultera.

Haec autem ratio nulla esse videtur, si enim non esset desponsata, non posset de adulterio condemnari. Et ita non videtur rationabile fuisse quod christus de desponsata nasceretur.

Sed Contra

Sed contra est quod dicitur Matth. I, cum esset desponsata mater eius maria ioseph; et Luc. I, missus est gabriel Angelus ad mariam, virginem desponsatam viro cui nomen erat ioseph.

Corpus

Respondeo dicendum quod conveniens fuit christum de desponsata virgine nasci, tum propter ipsum; tum propter matrem; tum etiam propter nos. Propter ipsum quidem christum, quadruplici ratione. Primo quidem, ne ab infidelibus tamquam illegitime natus abiiceretur.

Unde Ambrosius dicit, super Luc., quid Iudaeis, quid Herodi posset adscribi, si natum viderentur ex adulterio persecuti? secundo, ut consueto modo eius genealogia per virum describeretur.

Unde dicit Ambrosius, super Luc., qui in saeculum venit, saeculi debuit more describi. Viri autem persona quaeritur, qui in senatu et reliquis curiis civitatum generis asserit dignitatem. Consuetudo etiam nos instruit Scripturarum, quae semper viri originem quaerit.

Tertio, ad tutelam pueri nati, ne diabolus contra eum vehementius nocumenta procurasset.

Et ideo ignatius dicit ipsam fuisse desponsatam ut partus eius diabolo celaretur.

Quarto, ut a ioseph nutriretur. Unde et pater eius dictus est, quasi nutritius. Fuit etiam conveniens ex parte virginis.

Primo quidem, quia per hoc redditur immunis a poena, ne scilicet lapidaretur a Iudaeis tanquam adultera, ut Hieronymus dicit.

Secundo, ut per hoc ab infamia liberaretur.

Unde dicit Ambrosius super Luc., quod desponsata est ne temeratae virginitatis adureretur infamia, cui gravis alvus corruptelae videretur insigne praeferre.

Tertio, ut ei a ioseph ministerium exhiberetur, ut Hieronymus dicit.

Ex parte etiam nostra hoc fuit conveniens. Primo quidem, quia testimonio ioseph comprobatum est christum ex virgine natum.

Unde Ambrosius dicit, super Luc., locupletior testis pudoris maritus adhibetur, qui posset et dolere iniuriam et vindicare opprobrium si non agnosceret sacramentum.

Secundo, quia ipsa verba virginis magis credibilia redduntur, suam virginitatem asserentis.

Unde Ambrosius dicit, super Luc., fides mariae verbis magis asseritur, et mendacii causa removetur. Videtur enim culpam obumbrare voluisse mendacio innupta praegnans, causam autem mentiendi desponsata non habuit, cum coniugii praemium et gratia nuptiarum partus sit feminarum.

Quae quidem duo pertinent ad firmitatem fidei nostrae. Tertio, ut tolleretur excusatio virginibus quae, propter incautelam suam, non vitant infamiam.

Unde Ambrosius dicit, non decuit virginibus sinistra opinione viventibus velamen excusationis relinqui, quod infamia mater quoque domini ureretur.

Quarto, quia per hoc significatur universa ecclesia, quae, cum virgo sit, desponsata tamen est uni viro christo, ut Augustinus dicit, in libro de sancta virginitate.

Potest etiam quinta ratio esse quia, quod mater domini fuit desponsata et virgo, in persona ipsius et virginitas et matrimonium honoratur, contra haereticos alteri horum detrahentes.

Ad 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod beata virgo mater dei ex familiari instinctu spiritus sancti credenda est desponsari voluisse, confidens de divino auxilio quod nunquam ad carnalem copulam perveniret, hoc tamen divino commisit arbitrio. Unde nullum passa est virginitatis detrimentum.

Ad 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod, sicut Ambrosius dicit, super Luc., maluit dominus aliquos de suo ortu quam de matris pudore dubitare. Sciebat enim teneram esse virginis verecundiam, et lubricam famam pudoris, nec putavit ortus sui fidem matris iniuriis adstruendam.

Sciendum tamen quod miraculorum dei quaedam sunt de quibus est fides, sicut miraculum virginei partus, et resurrectionis domini, et etiam sacramenti altaris. Et ideo dominus voluit ista occultiora esse, ut fides eorum magis meritoria esset. Quaedam vero miracula sunt ad fidei comprobationem.

Et ista debent esse manifesta.

Ad 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod, sicut Augustinus dicit, in III de Trin., diabolus multa potest virtute suae naturae, a quibus tamen prohibetur virtute divina.

Et hoc modo potest dici quod virtute suae naturae diabolus cognoscere poterat matrem dei non fuisse corruptam, sed virginem, prohibebatur tamen a deo cognoscere modum partus divini. Quod autem postmodum eum aliqualiter cognovit diabolus esse filium dei, non obstat, quia iam tempus erat ut christus suam virtutem contra diabolum ostenderet, et persecutionem ab eo concitatam pateretur. Sed in infantia oportebat impediri malitiam diaboli, ne eum acrius persequeretur, quando christus nec pati disposuerat, nec virtutem suam ostendere, sed in omnibus aliis infantibus se similem exhibebat.

Unde leo Papa, in sermone de epiphania, dicit quod magi invenerunt puerum iesum quantitate parvum, alienae opis indigentem, fandi impotentem, et in nullo ab humanae infantiae generalitate discretum.

Ambrosius tamen, super Luc., videtur magis referre ad membra diaboli. Praemissa enim hac ratione, scilicet de fallendo principem mundi, subdit, sed tamen magis fefellit principes saeculi. Daemonum enim malitia facile etiam occulta deprehendit, at vero qui saecularibus vanitatibus occupantur, scire divina non possunt.

Ad 4

Ad quartum dicendum quod iudicio adulterorum lapidabatur secundum legem non solum illa quae iam erat desponsata vel nupta, sed etiam illa quae in domo patris custodiebatur ut virgo quandoque nuptura.

Unde dicitur Deut. XXII, si non est in puella inventa virginitas, lapidibus obruent eam viri civitatis illius, et morietur, quia fecit nefas in Israel, ut fornicaretur in domo patris sui.

Vel potest dici, secundum quosdam, quod beata virgo erat de stirpe sive parentela Aaron, unde erat cognata elisabeth, ut dicitur Luc. I.

Virgo autem de genere sacerdotali propter stuprum occidebatur, legitur enim Levit. XXI, sacerdotis filia si deprehensa fuerit in stupro, et violaverit nomen patris sui, flammis exuretur.

Quidam referunt verbum Hieronymi ad lapidationem infamiae.