Semper Virgo: A Confessional Position

On account of this personal union and communion of the natures, Mary, the most blessed Virgin, bore not a mere man, but, as the angel [Gabriel] testifies, such a man as is truly the Son of the most high God, who showed His divine majesty even in His mother's womb, inasmuch as He was born of a virgin, with her virginity inviolate. Therefore she is truly the mother of God, and nevertheless remained a virgin. ~Solid Declaration VIII:24

The Book of Concord doesn't say a whole lot about Mary, the Mother of God. But what it does say, I assert, says quite a bit in itself.

Most Lutheran parishioners in the 21st century deny the historic Christian position of the Semper Virgo, or the perpetual virginity of Mary. A recent poll in a facebook group in which I am administrator bears this out. It seems that at the very least, 75% of Lutherans reject this position. I am estimating here, but this estimate is pretty conservative in my mind.

I am not one of these people. Perhaps even some of my blog mates disagree with me here. I am not certain where they all stand on this particular topic.

I contend that it is most likely that our Lutheran forbears were absolutely referring to the ever-virginity of Mary in the final clause of the quoted Solid Declaration above.

Therefore she is truly the mother of God, and nevertheless remained a virgin.

The biggest reason I believe this to be so is that all of the early Reformers held to the Semper Virgo. Martin Luther certainly did.

The other reason I believe that the Solid Declaration is teaching the Semper Virgo is that it makes no sense whatsoever to include the final clause "...and nevertheless remained a virgin" if they are meaning to talk about something else. It just doesn't make any sense that they mean something like "she remained a virgin until after she had borne Christ." Since they have already strongly asserted the Virgin Birth, they really do not need to throw this clause in there unless they are referring to something more, such as the Semper Virgo.

Certainly I do recognize that there are arguments in the other direction, and both sides in this discussion use Scripture to support their stances, but that is a discussion for another day.

Yet, if the Semper Virgo is indeed the stance our Confessions take, should we not be believing it?

As for now, this will suffice.

This Confessional Lutheran blogger affirms the Semper Virgo.

+Pax+

Mary: Mother of God

There is a deep aversion within mainstream Evangelicalism to call  Mary anything other than the mother of Jesus. The terms "Mother of God" or even the ancient "Theotokos" are frowned upon. But why?

I think there are two major reasons as to why this is so. The first reason is that people do not understand the theology behind the title. The second reason is that people are scared of Roman Catholicism in particular and church history in general; instead preferring an approach that boils down to "me, my bible, and the Holy Spirit."

The most common arguments that I have run across regarding the term Mother of God is that a) this makes Mary divine, b) this allows for prayers to Mary, and c) she is simply the mother of Jesus the man.

Look, I understand the hesitance. I really do. Yet, all of these arguments fall flat. In the first case, the answer is no, it does not make Mary divine. In all actuality, calling Mary the Mother of God is a statement about Jesus. Jesus was really God while in the womb of Mary. After all, we confess that He was conceived by the Holy Spirit (Apostle's Creed). If Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit, He is God, even at conception. Therefore, Mary was carrying the fully divine -and fully human- Jesus in her womb. Really and truly, Mary bore God in her womb. It does not make Mary divine!

In the second case; that this title allows for prayer to Mary, well, that is simply not true. In reality, Mary being the Mother of God and praying to her don't have much to do with each other. One does not naturally flow from the other one, as it were. This doctrine of praying to Mary for interecession is extrapolated from other ideas in addition to Mary being the Mother of Christ.

The third objection is a true argument in one way. Mary is actually the mother of Jesus the man. That is true. But, Christ is one person, not two. Thus, if Mary is the mother of Jesus the man, she is also the mother of Jesus the God, for you cannot separate the natures of Christ from His person. To do so is to commit the heresy of Nestorianism. Or worse.

To sum this all up, the terms Mother of God as well as the Greek Theotokos are both terms about Christ far more than they are about Mary. And to deny what either of them actually teaches runs a person headlong into Christological heresy.

Therefore, as Confessional Lutherans, we ought to cherish these terms as terms that are part of our catholic heritage. Not only so, we ought to use them freely because they are true and accurately reflect what we believe regarding Mary!

Using them does not make us Roman Catholics, nor does it require that we seek Mary as an intercessor. Using them simply makes us orthodox. These terms are, to put it bluntly, biblical. The Roman Catholic church did not invent the term Mother of God in order to elevate Mary to some sort of divine status. We use it because we are orthodox Christians. We are not Nestorians or some other sort of heresy.

So, use these terms freely. They are true. They are historical. They speak about Christ. And they are biblical.

+Pax+