Talk:Perpetual virginity of Mary

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Christianity / Saints / Catholicism (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Saints.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Catholicism (marked as Mid-importance).
 
WikiProject Women's History (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Virginity during birth[edit]

What is the significance of this statement, which comes up multiple times in the article? Why would a virgin before giving birth lose her status in virtue of having done so? Was there a tradition that babies being delivered were, in the process of birth, metaphorically engaged in intercourse with their mothers? --Gargletheape (talk) 14:50, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

The meaning is: with hymen intact. Lima (talk) 19:05, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
this Belief is not supported by any face - it is from a RELIGION - that speak volumes! —Preceding unsigned comment added by GADFLY46 (talkcontribs) 02:23, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
Obviously a woman's body changes after giving birth. Her hymen was intact, nothing was changed. Her body was as if she never gave birth. --Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 12:23, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Virginity is not defined by an intact hymen. Many virgins do not have intact hymens. Slrubenstein | Talk 17:52, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
It is important in church teaching. Her body was not changed by the birth at all. --Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 21:53, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Non sequitor. You are not responding to what I orte. I said that many virgins do not have intact hymens. Did you think I was referring to some other virgins who also gave birth to sons? I wrote that many virgins do not have intact hymens, I am talking about virgins, not about girls who have had children. Wasn't it obvious that I was not referring to any change occuring during conception, pregnancy, or birth. The Church cannot possibly teach that Mary's body underwent no changes from birth - she got bigger, and surely began to menstruate, these are changes. Many girls break their hymens during childhood. Slrubenstein | Talk 23:22, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
I do not think you are understanding what I am saying. her body was not changed BY the birth. Yes, she was pregnant and got "bigger", but after she gave birth, her body was as it was she had never had child. --Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 21:26, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
I understand exactly what you are saying. Can you tell me 'where I ever even hinted that her body was changed BY the birth? Since I never suggested that, your comment does not follow mine. Slrubenstein | Talk 22:57, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
"The Church cannot possibly teach that Mary's body underwent no changes from birth - she got bigger, and surely began to menstruate, these are changes". Those changes went away, to a point as if they never had happened. That is all. I don't see how that is so confusing to you. --Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 23:43, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
I am not confused, you are. All I said was that there is no reason to think she had an intact hymen, that simply has nothing to do with virginity. Slrubenstein | Talk 01:29, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Then your comments on this section have no meaning. I never said an intact hymen was necessary for virginity. Be civil. All I said was that the church teaches her body was not changed. I never even originally commented on something you said, you wrote to me. The church teaches her body was uncorupted and her hymen was intact. Got a problem? Address the Pope. --Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 16:43, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
You wrote "Her hymen was intact," with no evidence, and and Lima wrote that virginity = intact hymen. I was responding to these two comments, by you and by Lima - you are not the only one participating in this discussion and I have a right to reply to Lima, not just you, so please be civil. Where does the Church teach that her hymen was intact? A torn humen is no more a corruption of the body than mensturation, or the growth of pubic hair. So your point about corruption of the body is irrelevant. And I must ask you, where have I ever suggested that her giving birth to Jesus changed her body? Please be civil and respond to what I wrote, and not to what I did not write, when you respond to me. Slrubenstein | Talk 17:35, 10 December 2010 (UTC)


The idea of perpetual virginity I understand. Virginity, to use a biblical phrase, is a woman not having been known by a man. But what is meant by virginity being preserved "during and after giving birth". Virginity and childbirth are entirely different.203.184.41.226 (talk) 19:30, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Where's section for opposition?[edit]

As we know, there have been many, who have opposed the Virginity of Mary. So I would like to know about such section of this page, or if it can be created, if there's none right now. Bladesmulti (talk) 06:30, 31 December 2013 (UTC)