{"id":52118,"date":"2020-10-17T15:45:04","date_gmt":"2020-10-17T19:45:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?p=52118"},"modified":"2020-10-17T15:45:04","modified_gmt":"2020-10-17T19:45:04","slug":"jason-engwer-hippolytus-marys-perpetual-virginity","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/10\/jason-engwer-hippolytus-marys-perpetual-virginity.html","title":{"rendered":"Jason Engwer, Hippolytus, & Mary’s Perpetual Virginity"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<\/head>

\"\"<\/p>\n

Protestant apologist Jason Engwer wrote:<\/p>\n

Tertullian and Helvidius are often named as early opponents of Mary\u2019s perpetual virginity, but other opponents of the concept seem to be mentioned less often. . . . What I want to do in this post is cite some other examples.<\/span><\/p>\n

In the West before Hilary \u2013 that is, up to the middle of the fourth century \u2013 there is no witness at all for the \u2018semper virgo\u2019 [perpetual virginity]; and that can hardly be a mere chance: see pp. 72 f. below. Hippolytus, too, regards the \u2018brothers of Jesus\u2019 as the children of Joseph and Mary\u2026 [apparently quoting Hippolytus:] \u2018He [Jesus] did [not] acknowledge as brothers those who were regarded as his brothers according to the body; the Redeemer did not acknowledge them, because in truth those [were] not his brothers who were born from Joseph through seed, but he from the Virgin and the Holy Spirit; and they regarded them as his brothers, but he did not acknowledge them.\u2019 (Hans von Campenhausen, The Virgin Birth In The Theology Of The Ancient Church<\/em> [Eugene, Oregon: Wipf & Stock, 2011], n. 4 on 48-9)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

. . . what should we conclude from the English translation he provides of that one passage?<\/span><\/p>\n

If the brothers were \u201cborn from Joseph through seed\u201d, then Hippolytus at least believed they were children of Joseph from a former marriage, thus differing from the more popular view that they were cousins of Jesus or some other more distant type of relatives. But was he denying Mary\u2019s perpetual virginity?<\/span><\/p>\n

Probably. To reconcile the passage with perpetual virginity, I think we\u2019d have to take a few problematic steps. We\u2019d have to assume a prior marriage of Joseph, which would be an unusual scenario and one not implied by the text. Second, if the relatives of Jesus in question were regarded as \u201cbrothers\u201d without further qualification, the most natural way to take that term is as a reference to individuals with a biological relationship with both Joseph and Mary. If the individuals were all older than Jesus and older than Joseph\u2019s marriage to Mary, having been born during a former marriage, it\u2019s highly doubtful that they\u2019d all be mistaken for biological offspring of Joseph and Mary. Third, we\u2019d have to assume that Hippolytus failed to mention the first wife of Joseph (by description or name), even though mentioning her would have strengthened his point (by putting even more distance between Jesus and the brothers).<\/span><\/p>\n

Why, then, does Hippolytus say that the individuals in question were \u201cregarded\u201d as brothers of Jesus? He can\u2019t be denying that they were brothers in\u00a0any<\/i>\u00a0sense. Even in a perpetual virginity scenario involving children from a former marriage of Joseph, the individuals in question would be brothers in a legal context. So, all that Hippolytus seems to be getting at by using the \u201cregarded\u201d qualifier is that the men weren\u2019t brothers in the fullest sense, even though they were thought of that way. That would be true regardless of whether Mary was a perpetual virgin, so it\u2019s an irrelevant issue. (<\/span><\/span>\u201cMore Early Opponents Of Mary\u2019s Perpetual Virginity\u201d<\/a>:\u00a0Tribalblogue<\/em>, 11-27-14)<\/span><\/p>\n

This is classic Engwer polemics: take a dubious proposed \u201cproof\u201d of an assertion he already holds and obfuscate, engage in obscurantism and sophism, special plead, create as much doubt and confusion as possible, as to the traditional Catholic interpretation, and hope that readers (most of whom already agree with him) will be persuaded by such nefarious methods. In this instance, he seems to be aware of how weak and speculative a \u201cproof\u201d he is working with: leading to an excessive amount of special pleading (even by his<\/em> low standards of research).<\/p>\n

Yet, rather than admit as much, he digs in and gives it all he has to try to make his long shot position work. It\u2019s all in vain, because St. Hippolytus (c. 170 \u2013 235) elsewhere calls Mary ever-virgin<\/em>, which is a definitive indication that she had no other children. Case closed. Thus, much ado about nothing, trying to make this \u201csquare peg\u201d passage fit into the \u201csquare hole\u201d of Mary\u2019s perpetual virginity. If Jason had spent another ten minutes searching \u201cHippolytus, perpetual virginity\u201d he could have save himself the embarrassment of trying to make a hopeless argument. But he didn\u2019t, and so I had to write this paper and set the record straight.<\/p>\n

Hippolytus wrote, c. 210:<\/p>\n

But the pious confession of the believer is that, with a view to our salvation, and in order to connect the universe with unchangeableness, the Creator of all things incorporated with Himself\u00a0a rational soul and a sensible\u00a0body from the all-holy Mary, ever-virgin<\/strong>, by an undefiled conception, without conversion, and was made man in nature, but separate from wickedness: the same was perfect God, and the same was perfect man; the same was in nature at once perfect God and man.\u00a0 (Against Beron and Helix<\/i><\/a>, Frag VIII; my bolding)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Likewise,\u00a0The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge<\/em>, Volume 12 (\u201cVirgin Birth\u201d<\/a>), reinforces this view with regard to St. Hippolytus and also St. Clement of Alexandria (c. 150 \u2013 c. 215), and Origen (c. 184 \u2013 c. 253):<\/p>\n

Clement of Alexandria taught unequivocally the virgin birth\u2014the only virgin mother\u00a0(P\u00e6dagogus<\/em>,\u00a0i. 6)\u2014and appears inclined to the notion of a miraculous birth as well as a miraculous conception\u00a0(Strom<\/em>., vii, 16; Eng. transl. in ANF, vol. ii.). . . .<\/p>\n

This\u00a0doctrine of\u00a0<\/span>the\u00a0perpetual virginity\u00a0<\/span>of Mary was advanced a further stage by Origen, whose principal discussion of the virgin birth appears in reply to Celsus, who had assailed this doctrine. . . .<\/p>\n

Hippolytus maintained\u00a0<\/span>the perfect purity and\u00a0perpetual virginity\u00a0<\/span>of Mary\u00a0(Adv.\u00a0Veronem<\/em>), . . .<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The great Protestant scholar J. B. Lightfoot explained what the early Church believed about the perpetual virginity of Mary, in his work, Dissertations on the Apostolic Age<\/em>\u00a0<\/a>(1892; section: \u201cThe Brethren of the Lord\u201d<\/a>):<\/p>\n

\n

In the early ages of the Church two conflicting opinions\u00a0were held regarding the relationship of those who in the Gospels and Apostolic Epistles are termed \u2018the brethren of the\u00a0Lord.\u2019 On the one hand it was maintained that no blood relationship existed; that these brethren were in fact sons of Joseph by a former wife, before he espoused the Virgin; and that they are therefore called the Lord\u2019s brethren only in the same way in which Joseph is called His father, having really no claim to this title but being so designated by an exceptional use of the term adapted to the exceptional fact of the miraculous incarnation. On the other hand certain persons argued that the obvious meaning of the term was the correct meaning, and that these brethren were the Lord\u2019s brethren as truly as Mary was the Lord\u2019s mother, being her sons by her husband Joseph. The former of these views was held by the vast majority of orthodox believers and by not a few heretics; the latter was the opinion of a father of the Church here and there to whom it occurred as the natural inference from the language of Scripture, as Tertullian for instance, and of certain sects and individuals who set themselves against the incipient worship of the Virgin or the one-sided asceticism of the day, and to whom therefore it was a very serviceable weapon of controversy. . . .<\/p>\n

Thus it would appear that, taking the scriptural notices alone, the Hieronymian account [that the \u201cbrethren\u201d were cousins of Jesus] must be abandoned; while of the remaining two the balance of the argument is against the Helvidian [the \u201cbrethren\u201d were literal siblings or blood brothers] and in favour of the Epiphanian [they were sons of a former marriage of Joseph]. To what extent the last-mentioned theory can plead the prestige of tradition, will be seen from the following catena of references to the fathers and other early Christian writings. . . .<\/p>\n

[T]he testimony of Hegesippus [c. 110 \u2013 c. 180] . . . favours the Epiphanian rather than the Helvidian [view]. . . .<\/p>\n

Origen [c. 184 \u2013 c. 253]. . . declares himself very distinctly in favour of the Epiphanian view, stating that the brethren were sons of Joseph by a deceased wife. . . .<\/p>\n

In one passage he [Origen] writes at some length on the subject; \u2018Some persons, on the ground of a tradition in the Gospel according to Peter, as it is entitled, or the Book of James (i.e. the Protevangelium), say that the brothers of Jesus were Joseph\u2019s sons by a former wife to whom he was married before Mary. Those who hold this view wish to preserve the honour of Mary in\u00a0virginity\u00a0<\/span>throughout\u2026 And I think it reasonable that as Jesus was the first-fruit of purity and chastity among men, so Mary was among women: for it is not seemly to ascribe the first-fruit of\u00a0virginity\u00a0<\/span>to any other woman but her\u2019\u00a0(in\u00a0Matt.<\/em>\u00a0xiii. 55, III. p. 462)\u2019. This passage shows not only that Origen himself favoured the Epiphanian view which elsewhere he has directly maintained, but that he was wholly unaware of the Hieronymian, . . . (pp. 3-4, 25, 31, 34-35)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Jason will have to go back and revise his research, if he wishes to claim Hippolytus (or any of the other fathers above, save the eventual heretic Tertullian) for his heretical and unbiblical (and also anti-Protestant \u201cReformers\u201d) view of the \u201cbrothers of Jesus\u201d allegedly being His blood brothers and sons (younger brothers and\/or sisters) of the Blessed Virgin Mary also.<\/p>\n

***<\/p>\n

Photo credit:\u00a0<\/strong>The Madonna in Sorrow<\/em>, by\u00a0Giovanni Battista Salvi da Sassoferrato (1609 \u2013 1685)<\/span> [public domain \/ Wikimedia Commons<\/a>]<\/p>\n

***<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Protestant apologist Jason Engwer wrote: Tertullian and Helvidius are often named as early opponents of Mary\u2019s perpetual virginity, but other opponents of the concept seem to be mentioned less often. . . . What I want to do in this post is cite some other examples. In the West before Hilary \u2013 that is, up […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2331,"featured_media":52121,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[231,45,239],"tags":[1600,2357,508,3456,12145,3455,1500,503,2356,680,507,3457,685,39,681,944,504,687],"class_list":["post-52118","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-anti-catholicism","category-blessed-virgin-mary","category-fathers-of-the-church","tag-always-virgin","tag-blessed-virgin-mary","tag-catholic-mariology","tag-ever-virgin","tag-hippolytus-perpetual-virginity","tag-in-partu-virginity","tag-jason-engwer","tag-marian-doctrine","tag-mariology","tag-mary-mother-of-jesus","tag-mother-of-god","tag-our-lady","tag-perpetual-virginity","tag-perpetual-virginity-of-mary","tag-theotokos","tag-virgin-birth","tag-virgin-mary","tag-virginity-during-childbirth"],"yoast_head":"\nJason Engwer, Hippolytus, & Mary's Perpetual Virginity Jason Engwer, Hippolytus, & Mary's Perpetual Virginity<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Protestant apologist Jason Engwer wrote: Tertullian and Helvidius are often named as early opponents of Mary's perpetual virginity, but other opponents of Jason Engwer tries SO hard to argue ("prove"?) that St. Hippolytus (c. 170 - 235) denied Mary's perpetual virginity, but I found an excerpt where he called her "ever-virgin." Case closed!\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/10\/jason-engwer-hippolytus-marys-perpetual-virginity.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Jason Engwer, Hippolytus, & Mary's Perpetual Virginity Jason Engwer, Hippolytus, & Mary's Perpetual Virginity\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Protestant apologist Jason Engwer wrote: Tertullian and Helvidius are often named as early opponents of Mary's perpetual virginity, but other opponents of Jason Engwer tries SO hard to argue ("prove"?) that St. Hippolytus (c. 170 - 235) denied Mary's perpetual virginity, but I found an excerpt where he called her "ever-virgin." Case closed!\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/10\/jason-engwer-hippolytus-marys-perpetual-virginity.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:author\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-10-17T19:45:04+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2020\/10\/Mary41.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"475\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"600\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/10\/jason-engwer-hippolytus-marys-perpetual-virginity.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/10\/jason-engwer-hippolytus-marys-perpetual-virginity.html\",\"name\":\"Jason Engwer, Hippolytus, & Mary's Perpetual Virginity Jason Engwer, Hippolytus, & Mary's Perpetual Virginity\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2020-10-17T19:45:04+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-10-17T19:45:04+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\"},\"description\":\"Protestant apologist Jason Engwer wrote: Tertullian and Helvidius are often named as early opponents of Mary's perpetual virginity, but other opponents of Jason Engwer tries SO hard to argue (\\\"prove\\\"?) that St. Hippolytus (c. 170 - 235) denied Mary's perpetual virginity, but I found an excerpt where he called her \\\"ever-virgin.\\\" Case closed!\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/10\/jason-engwer-hippolytus-marys-perpetual-virginity.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/10\/jason-engwer-hippolytus-marys-perpetual-virginity.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/10\/jason-engwer-hippolytus-marys-perpetual-virginity.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jason Engwer, Hippolytus, & Mary’s Perpetual Virginity\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/\",\"name\":\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\",\"description\":\"Catholic biblical apologetics\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\",\"name\":\"Dave Armstrong\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Dave Armstrong\"},\"description\":\"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \\\"This Rock\\\" (now called \\\"Catholic Answers Magazine\\\"), \\\"Envoy Magazine\\\" (Patrick Madrid), \\\"The Catholic Answer,\\\" \\\"The Coming Home Journal,\\\" \\\"Gilbert Magazine\\\" (American Chesterton Society), and \\\"The Latin Mass.\\\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \\\"The Michigan Catholic\\\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \\\"Catholic Answers Live\\\" (twice), \\\"Faith and Family Live\\\" (Steve Wood), \\\"Kresta in the Afternoon,\\\" \\\"Son Rise Morning Show,\\\" \\\"Catholic Connection\\\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \\\"The Catholics Next Door.\\\" His large and popular website, \\\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\\\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \\\"index\\\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \\\"Surprised by Truth\\\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \\\"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\\\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \\\"The Catholic Verses\\\" (2004), \\\"The One-Minute Apologist\\\" (2007), \\\"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\\\" (2009), \\\"The Quotable Newman\\\" (editor: 2012), and \\\"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\\\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \\\"The New Catholic Answer Bible\\\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \\\"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\\\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \\\"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\\\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \\\"Quotable Wesley\\\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/\",\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LuxVeritatisApologetics\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Jason Engwer, Hippolytus, & Mary's Perpetual Virginity Jason Engwer, Hippolytus, & Mary's Perpetual Virginity","description":"Protestant apologist Jason Engwer wrote: Tertullian and Helvidius are often named as early opponents of Mary's perpetual virginity, but other opponents of Jason Engwer tries SO hard to argue (\"prove\"?) that St. Hippolytus (c. 170 - 235) denied Mary's perpetual virginity, but I found an excerpt where he called her \"ever-virgin.\" Case closed!","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/10\/jason-engwer-hippolytus-marys-perpetual-virginity.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Jason Engwer, Hippolytus, & Mary's Perpetual Virginity Jason Engwer, Hippolytus, & Mary's Perpetual Virginity","og_description":"Protestant apologist Jason Engwer wrote: Tertullian and Helvidius are often named as early opponents of Mary's perpetual virginity, but other opponents of Jason Engwer tries SO hard to argue (\"prove\"?) that St. Hippolytus (c. 170 - 235) denied Mary's perpetual virginity, but I found an excerpt where he called her \"ever-virgin.\" Case closed!","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/10\/jason-engwer-hippolytus-marys-perpetual-virginity.html","og_site_name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","article_published_time":"2020-10-17T19:45:04+00:00","og_image":[{"width":475,"height":600,"url":"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2020\/10\/Mary41.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Dave Armstrong","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Dave Armstrong","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/10\/jason-engwer-hippolytus-marys-perpetual-virginity.html","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/10\/jason-engwer-hippolytus-marys-perpetual-virginity.html","name":"Jason Engwer, Hippolytus, & Mary's Perpetual Virginity Jason Engwer, Hippolytus, & Mary's Perpetual Virginity","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website"},"datePublished":"2020-10-17T19:45:04+00:00","dateModified":"2020-10-17T19:45:04+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e"},"description":"Protestant apologist Jason Engwer wrote: Tertullian and Helvidius are often named as early opponents of Mary's perpetual virginity, but other opponents of Jason Engwer tries SO hard to argue (\"prove\"?) that St. Hippolytus (c. 170 - 235) denied Mary's perpetual virginity, but I found an excerpt where he called her \"ever-virgin.\" Case closed!","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/10\/jason-engwer-hippolytus-marys-perpetual-virginity.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/10\/jason-engwer-hippolytus-marys-perpetual-virginity.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/10\/jason-engwer-hippolytus-marys-perpetual-virginity.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jason Engwer, Hippolytus, & Mary’s Perpetual Virginity"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/","name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","description":"Catholic biblical apologetics","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e","name":"Dave Armstrong","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Dave Armstrong"},"description":"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \"This Rock\" (now called \"Catholic Answers Magazine\"), \"Envoy Magazine\" (Patrick Madrid), \"The Catholic Answer,\" \"The Coming Home Journal,\" \"Gilbert Magazine\" (American Chesterton Society), and \"The Latin Mass.\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \"The Michigan Catholic\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \"Envoy Magazine.\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \"Catholic Answers Live\" (twice), \"Faith and Family Live\" (Steve Wood), \"Kresta in the Afternoon,\" \"Son Rise Morning Show,\" \"Catholic Connection\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \"The Catholics Next Door.\" His large and popular website, \"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \"Envoy Magazine.\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \"index\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \"Surprised by Truth\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \"The Catholic Verses\" (2004), \"The One-Minute Apologist\" (2007), \"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\" (2009), \"The Quotable Newman\" (editor: 2012), and \"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \"The New Catholic Answer Bible\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \"Quotable Wesley\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).","sameAs":["https:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LuxVeritatisApologetics"],"url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/52118","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2331"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=52118"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/52118\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/52121"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=52118"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=52118"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=52118"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}