I'm Glad You Asked

Questions from the parishioners of
St. Charles Borromeo Catholic Church
Picayune, Mississippi


JESUS

Q. How do you know that Jesus is not St. Michael?

That Jesus was Michael the Archangel is a teaching of the Jehovah's Witnesses who deny the Trinity and that Jesus is God. The Witnesses base their belief on 1Thessalonians 4:16 "For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet of God . . ." (KJV). The Bible does tell us that St. Michael is an angel. Jude 9 says "Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil . . . " (KJV). This same Holy Bible also tells us that Jesus is both God and man.

"no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost" (1 Corinthians 12:3, KJV)

"we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honor; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man" (Hebrews 2:9, KJV).

"Lord" is a term synonymous in Hebrew usage with God. At the same time he was "made a little lower than the angels," he became man. We have here the hierarchy of God, angels, man.

In the account of Jesus' baptism by John the Baptist, God says of Jesus

"This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased." (Matthew 3:17, KJV)

while in Hebrews 1:5-6 (KJV) we read

"For to what angel did God ever say, ‘Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee'? Or again, ‘I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son'? And again, when he brings the first-born into the world, he says, ‘Let all God's angels worship him.'"

If God calls Jesus "Son" but doesn't call any of the angels "Son" and at the same time directs the angels to worship Jesus when He is walking upon this earth, it is quite obvious that Jesus was not St. Michael the Archangel but is in fact God incarnate.

 

Q. Was Jesus an only child?
Q. How do you know that Mary had no other children?
Q. What tells us that Jesus doesn't have any brothers?
Q. Doesn't the Bible teach that Jesus had siblings?

There are some who claim that Jesus was not an only child, that Mary had children in addition to Jesus. Whether Jesus was an only child or whether He had a dozen siblings really matters not a whit to them except that it attacks the Catholic Church in what they consider to be the weak area, Marian doctrine. They will cite such biblical passages as:

"...his mother and his brethren stood without . . . " (Matthew 12:46, KJV),

"Is this not the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses and of Judah, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us?" (Mark 6:3, KJV),

"For even his own brothers did not believe in him." (John 7:5, NIV),

"...with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren." (Acts 1:14, KJV),

". . . and the Lord's brothers . . . " (1 Corinthians 9:5, NIV); or

"But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son" (Matthew 1:25, NIV).

The Church teaches us that Mary was perpetually a virgin and this is what we affirm every time we recite the Confiteor (Penitential Rite) ". . . and I ask the blessed Mary, ever virgin . . ." The perpetual virginity of Mary has been defended by the Church since the 4th century when St. Athanasius wrote in his Discourses Against the Aryans (A.D. 358-362): "He took true human flesh from the Ever-Virgin Mary." Pope St. Siricius defended the teaching in 392, and the fifth ecumenical council (Constantinople II) in 553 gave Mary the title "perpetual virgin."

Why the difference? It comes with the fact that almost twenty centuries have passed since the books of the Bible were written and customs have changed, along with the fact that some people read into the texts meanings which were not intended. First century customs cannot be interpreted with twentieth century values.

In the first case, what was the custom for calling someone your brother, sister, or using the collective term of brethren? In Genesis 14:14 (KJV) Lot is called Abraham's brother but Genesis 11:27 tells us that Lot was the son of Haran, Abraham's brother. This shows that the terms were used to include cousins; but they were not even limited to close relatives (see Deuteronomy 23:7 and Jeremiah 34:9 for examples). Why was this? Neither Hebrew nor Aramaic (the language spoken by Jesus and the Apostles) had a special word for cousin. Instead, the words brother, sister, brethren were commonly used. The writers of the New Testament, although writing in Greek, were raised in the Hebrew tradition and kept to this tradition as they were writing primarily to other Jewish Christians. Acts 2:46 illustrates that these Jewish Christians went to temple in addition to worshiping together.

Now let's go back to Mark 6:3 where the ‘brothers' of Jesus are named and consider James and Joses. Compare the descriptions of the women at the foot of the cross in Matthew 27:56, Mark 15:40 and John 19:25. From this we find that Mary the mother of James and Joses must be the wife of Cleophas. No one has ever suggested that the Blessed Virgin remarried, especially since Jesus entrusted her care to John. Similar arguments can be made for the other ‘brethren'.

Let's go on to Matthew 1:25 and find the meaning of ‘until' (or ‘till' in some translations). "He knew her not until she brought forth her firstborn son" doesn't necessarily mean that he knew her after the event took place. For example, in 2 Samuel 6:23 we find the line "Michal the daughter of Saul had not children until the day of her death." Does this mean that she had children after she died?

Sometimes someone will assert that since Jesus is referred to as the "firstborn," others must have followed. This shows a misunderstanding of the use of the term. Under Mosaic law, the "firstborn" son was to be sanctified (Exodus 34:20). This doesn't mean that the parents had to wait until a second son was born. The first boy born was termed "firstborn" (the one who opened the womb) even if he was an only child.

Finally, let's look at the Annunciation itself (Luke 1:28 and following). Mary's response "How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?" (KJV) makes no sense unless she had taken a vow to remain perpetually virgin. At this point in her life, Mary is betrothed, which is by Jewish custom, married to Joseph; although they have not yet taken up residence together, an event that took place after the marriage feast. The angel Gabriel has just told her that she will have a son, not that she is already pregnant. If she were planning to have relations with Joseph after the marriage feast, the likely result would be a child. Only if she had taken a vow of perpetual virginity does her response make sense. Some say that such a vow would result in an ‘unnatural' marriage. Is it ‘natural' to have a true virgin give birth? Is it ‘natural' to have angels announce the birth of your child? Is it ‘natural' to raise the Son of God in your family? All these events are supernatural.

Was Jesus an only child? In the biological sense, yes. In the spiritual sense, Romans 8:15-17 tells us that we are adopted children of God and coheirs with Christ if only we suffer with Him. Malachi 2:10 says "Have we not all one father? Has not one God created us?" Suffice it to say that Jesus has millions of ‘brethren'.

Recommended reading:
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1994, paragraphs 496-507, 510
Keating, Karl, Catholicism and Fundamentalism, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, CA, 1988, pages 282-289.
"Brethren of the Lord", A Catholic Answers Tract, Catholic Answers, P.O. Box 17490, San Diego, CA 92177.
"Does Greek prove Jesus had Brothers?", This Rock, The Magazine of Catholic Apologetics and Evangelization, May/June 1992, page 54.
"Keeping up with the Jameses?", This Rock, The Magazine of Catholic Apologetics and Evangelization, October 1992, page 29.

previous page    table of contents    next page
StCB