What did Epiphanius believe about Mary?

 

Epiphanius of Salamis

When it comes to discussing the historicity (or non-historicity) of Roman Catholic beliefs about Mary such as the immaculate conception (as well as the bodily assumption), one church father discussed a lot in these areas is Epiphanius of Salamis. Both sides of the debate, Roman Catholics as well as Reformed Protestants, appeal to Epiphanius' writings often to support their particular views about Mary. 

In this articles series, I want to deal with the material from Epiphanius' writings used by RC apologists (for part 1) and then provide material which shows that his Mariology was not Roman Catholic (for part 2).

Panarion 42:12

"How will holy Mary not possess the kingdom of heaven with her flesh, since she was not unchaste, nor dissolute, nor did she ever commit adultery, and since she never did anything wrong as far as fleshly actions are concerned, but remained stainless?" (The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis (Book 1, Sections 1-46), trans. Frank Williams, pg. 341)

The key phrase is "as far as fleshly actions" are concerned, which in the context of this passage from Epiphanius is talking about sexual sin. He is saying that Mary "remained stainless" in that regard. He doesn't give any other information as to whether or not Mary was immaculately conceived.

Panarion 30:31

“Mary, the holy Virgin, is truly great before God and men. For how shall we not proclaim her great, who held within her the uncontainable One, whom neither heaven nor earth can contain?” 

Nothing in here is said about whether or not Mary was sinless from the moment of conception. 

It should also be noted that "the uncontainable One" is talking about the Lord Jesus, not Mary. 

Panarion 78:21

"Whoever honors the Lord also honors the holy [vessel]; who instead dishonors the holy vessel also dishonors his Master. Mary herself is that holy Virgin, that is, the holy vessel." 

Again, nothing is said about whether or not Mary was sinless or immaculately conceived. 

Panarion 78

"The holy virgin may have died and been buried—her falling asleep was with honor, her death in purity, her crown in virginity. Or she may have been put to death—as the scripture says, “And a sword shall pierce through her soul” —her fame is among the martyrs and her holy body, by which light rose on the world, [rests] amid blessings. Or she may have remained alive, for God is not incapable of doing whatever he wills. No one knows her end."

This passage ultimately actually refutes the doctrine of Mary's bodily assumption (though many Roman Catholic apologists have gone to Epiphanius in the past to find proof for the bodily assumption, knowing that is a brand-new doctrine which has no biblical basis or support in the patristic writings). "No one knows her end" is the verdict of Epiphanius concerning the end of Mary's life. This is conflict with the bodily assumption, a doctrine which does try to explain Mary's end, i.e. that she was assumed body and soul into heaven. 

"Quite to the contrary, Epiphanius’ indecisive reflections themselves suggest that some difference of opinion had already arisen among Christians as to whether Mary actually died or remained immortal, a difference which Epiphanius could not resolve through recourse to either biblical or church tradition....As usual, Epiphanius here carefully avoids taking a position on what was for him an undefined point of dogma; instead, he chooses to report several distinct possibilities without embracing one or the other." (Stephen J. Shoemaker, Oxford Early Christian Studies - Ancient Traditions of the Virgin Mary's Dormition and Assumption, pg. 14)