Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

1417Re: [LutheransLookingEast] Re: Semper Virgo

Expand Messages
  • Christopher Orr
    Oct 8, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      I would say the primary impact would be in admitting that Jesus was not
      God. That is, we do not treat as sanctified a regular wine glass and plate;
      but, we treat as sanctified the chalice and paten used to hold the Body and
      Blood of Christ. Same with the various vessels in the OT Temple, and the
      Temple itself, which are seen as types of the Virgin (the candle stand that
      held the candle, the ark that held the commandments [the words of God],
      etc.). The Virgin remained a Virgin because She had become sanctified, the
      God of All Who created the heavens took up abode in a young girl who became
      more spacious than the heavens. She was sanctified, set apart; her eros
      (fervent love, not necessarily erotic) was turned from earthly, fleshly
      things and focused on God. The focus isn't on the lack of sexuality, but on
      the overwhelming experience of God making one forget about the body and this
      life in anticipation of God (our Life) and the next life.

      But, again, the question isn't what 'use' or 'impact' or 'good' the doctrine
      of semper virgo does in a theological schema. It is simply a part of the
      revelation, it is a part of the way in which the Fathers and the lex orandi
      reads Scripture. It simply is. Falling back on the 'obvious sense' of
      Scripture that Jesus must have had brothers is to forget how un-obvious so
      much in language(s) is (are) - it's only obvious given certain assumptions;
      given other assumptions a very different and equally 'obvious' answer
      results. Think of any idiomatic expressions being translated from one
      language to another; think of regional slang; think of cultural differences
      (e.g., dogs hold very different places in our culture than in Middle Eastern
      cultures), etc. A phrase from Rosemarie (?) yesterday was apt: not seeing
      the semper virgo in Scripture is a sign one is reading the Scriptures wrong
      since all the Fathers (and even Luther, Calvin and Zwingli) saw it in
      Scripture. To hold to another reading is to hold to an idiosyncratic,
      self-chosen exegesis, perspective, etc.


      On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Oruaseht <oruaseht@...> wrote:

      > Ignoring my arrogance in thinking I know the scriptures better than the
      > Church Fathers and 2000 years of Tradition, what impact does Semper Virgo
      > have on Christology?

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 14 messages in this topic