In the early 2nd century the early Church held a document in very high regard. From this document we learn about the parents of the Blessed Virgin Mary and her own birth.
Since today is the Feast Day of the Birth of the Virgin Mary, I thought I would provide a link to the Protoevangelium of James so you can read the fascinating story for yourself.
Remember, this is from about 150 AD and was read in many churches in the early years and considered with very high regard. In fact, it is from this document that we have the names of Mary’s parents, Joachim and Anna.
To join one of our pilgrimages, or to learn more, visit www.FootprintsOfGod.com or call my associates at 866-468-1420.
This Post Has 4 Comments
Can you shed a little light as to why this document is not considered scripture, and also to what extent are Catholics free to accept it as fact?
STEVE RAY HERE:
There were a lot of writings in the first century or two that were not accepted as canonical scripture. It took 400 years for the Church to determine which of the early writings were inspired by God and apostolic.
Ratings like the Protoevangelium of James were not accepted as inspired and canonical but still can contain good elements of history and truth. The difference is there were 27 books that the church declared as inspired or “God-breathed“ whereas others may be good history and theology but not directly from the mouth of God.
Sent from Steve Ray’s iPhone
http://www.CatholicConvert.com
http://www.FootprintsOfGod.com
Twitter.com/JerusalemJones
It is my understanding that the "Protoevangelium of James" is considered Gnostic and is highly suspect in both content and intent. Pointing to such a work as authoritative in matters like whether Mary was eternally virgin raises alarms on my radar screen.
STEVE RAY HERE: It Was highly regarded in mind the early Christians and among the Greek orthodox today. It is the source of the names Joachim and Anna, the parents of Mary. I would never claim that everything in it is correct, factual and historical. But it is interesting and possibly sheds light on a lot of Mary’s life.
“Pointing to such a work as authoritative in matters like whether Mary was eternally virgin raises alarms on my radar screen.”
There may be reasons to consider it suspect, but doubting her perpetual virginity isn’t one of them. She took a vow of perpetual virginity which is taught to us by Church Tradition among other sources. I’m guessing you are not Catholic to make such a statement. Remember, being conceived without original sin, Mary remained sinless throughout her entire life and was perfectly obedient to the Will of God. If you know of any theological errors in the writings, please enlighten us.
“Pointing to such a work as authoritative in matters like whether Mary was eternally virgin raises alarms on my radar screen.”
There may be reasons to consider it suspect, but doubting her perpetual virginity isn’t one of them. She took a vow of perpetual virginity which is taught to us by Church Tradition among other sources. I’m guessing you are not Catholic to make such a statement. Remember, being conceived without original sin, Mary remained sinless throughout her entire life and was perfectly obedient to the Will of God. If you know of any theological errors in the writings, please enlighten us.
Comments are closed.