Did Mary sleep with Joseph after she had Jesus?

[godisgood77]

Actually the term “overshadowed” is a euphemism for the marital embrace.

so not a virgin then?

Except that Mary was the spouse of another…

Polygamy?

Jeez…!! sorry…I’m being wise

 

[hope]

We cannot use modern ideas and present them as if they were also present in years past. I believe it is called an anachronism to do so. The culture was not one that would cuddle and kiss that is your modern idea. Why are you limiting your source to only the NT. You do need to look at 2 Samuels 6:7 and realize that Mary is the new Ark. I wondered if you knew that marriage takes place when the vows are exchanged? Fr. Robert J. Levis once wrote

Mary and Joseph did enter a valid marriage since they conferred on each other the radical right to copulate, but practically chose not to use that right in the light of what was revealed to both of them.

I also wondered where you got the information that they raised cousins, Never heard of this before

 

[guanophore]

You believe that Joseph couldnt have kissed or cuddled Mary because God would have killed him if he did so?

I am saying that Joseph, being well versed in the holiness of the Ark of the Covenant, would have known and accepted that it was not his place to put his hand to the Ark.

OK, when you can authoritatively quote that from the NT or even the Magisterium do come back

Are you saying you don’t understand Mary as the Ark of the Covenant, or that you are not aware that those who were not consecrated were allowed to touch the Ark?

 

[guanophore]

so not a virgin then?

Since God is Spirit, then the overshadowing did not involve physical intercourse with a penis.

Polygamy?

Exactly! Joseph understood Mary to already belong to another. This was his reason for wanting to break off the betrothal.

 

[godisgood77]

Are you saying you don’t understand Mary as the Ark of the Covenant, or that you are not aware that those who were not consecrated were allowed to touch the Ark?

I think we can all agree that disregarding that silly tradition is a very good thing.

 

[guanophore]

I think we can all agree that disregarding that silly tradition is a very good thing.

What “silly tradition” is that?

 

[guanophore]

You should know that this argument is often put forward in this way to establish Mary intent to remain a virgin even after marriage. You should also know that I find that argument pretty flimsy… your point about ‘being willing, but not asked’ seems more believable.

Is this because you don’t believe that certain women took vows of this kind, but were still given in marriage?

Or do you not believe that any woman would reasonably give up sexual activity?

Do you think that marriageable women were not educated about the birds and the bees? Do you think that Mary really did not know how females became with child, so that she had to ask the angel the facts of life?

 

[mVitus]

There’s an excellent book, Behold Your Mother by Tim Staples, that digs deep into this and other Marian dogmas. It can help clear up any confusion you have about Mary and her role in salvation history.

I was going to second the book, but someone else already did. So I’ll third it. I’m also reading it right now. And it deals with the “until” issue quite exhaustively for 6 pages. (185-191)

To do injustice to Staples’ work, one thing he says is that until doesn’t necessitate a change. He also points out that Scripture uses that meaning in other places such as 1 Cor 15:25 “For He must reign until He has put all enemies under His feet.” He’ll still reign even after the until. There are more examples he gives in the Old and New Testaments.

It’s a great book overall. And for someone who’s known about the Marian dogmas, but not really understood where they come from or why some are important, it’s been a great read that’s deepening my understanding.

 

[godisgood77]

What “silly tradition” is that?

Being struck dead for touching the ark

 

[Sophie111]

OK, I understand that you are unable to find an authoritative text.
God bless.

 

[Sophie111]

I mean some extra canonical texts point that way. The Protoevangelium of James claims she

Yes we are all aware of these pious, non Canonical works. They were left out of the canon for a reason.
Fantasy based on patterns that lack certain knowledge. Do you also believe baby Jesus made clay sparrows, blessed them and they flew away. Do you tend to believe also that Jesus did not exit Mary through her birth canal but through her abdomen…and that the midwife who dared to test her intact virginity ended up with a withered finger!

We simply do not know, and consistency of patterns (which the ancients loved to mine from the Bible like some sort of mathematical puzzle) does not truth make. That is the approach of flat-earthers. As the old riddle goes: “What is the difference between truth and fiction…only fiction has to make sense!”

 

[guanophore]

I think we can all agree that disregarding that silly tradition is a very good thing.

What “silly tradition” is that?

Being struck dead for touching the ark

It may seem good to you to disregard the instruction of the Almighty, and that is your prerogative. God has made you with free will, and you have the ability to reject His Word. Catholics believe that what has been written in the Scriptures is there for our instruction, and we do not have the liberty to dismiss any of it as “silly tradition”.

 

[guanophore]

OK, I understand that you are unable to find an authoritative text.

You did not answer my questions. Are you looking for a text that refers to Mary as the Ark of the Covenant?

Do you also believe baby Jesus made clay sparrows, blessed them and they flew away

I certainly would not put it past Him!

Do you find that activity less plausible than giving sight to the blind, or paralytics to rise and walk?

Do you tend to believe also that Jesus did not exit Mary through her birth canal but through her abdomen…and that the midwife who dared to test her intact virginity ended up with a withered finger!

Never heard that one before!

But no, this is not the teaching of the Church.

We simply do not know,

You may choose to reject what Divine Revelation has been given, therefore refusing the knowledge that comes from it, but those of us who accept what God has revealed do know.

“What is the difference between truth and fiction…only fiction has to make sense!”

You certainly do sound quite cynical. What are you doing on a Catholic Answers Forum?

 

[hope]

No you just have rejected the teaching of the Church

 

[hope]

@Sophie111 I should assume then that you have no answers?

 

[Carmel]

Mary existed entirely for Jesus and His ministry.
Catholics are not bound by " where is that in the Bible ? "
We have sacred tradition also.
St. Paul said "hold fast the traditions "
Hard for the modern mind to conceive that Mary was
’ ever available onlyto do always the will of God ’

 

[hope]

The answers I find lacking in substance are the ones that say that “I find” it flimsy without any explanation of why but then flimsy answers are usually without foundation.

 

[Wesrock]

I’m really more interested in if people believe that not having sex in a marriage increases one’s virtue or holiness? Or said a different way does having sex inside of marriage decrease one’s virtue or holiness. For me, outside of this question, the entire question of Mary’s Perpetual Virginity doesn’t really mean much and invites more questions than it does add to my faith.

Mary’s womb was the physical dwelling place of God. Her womb was like the Temple or Ark of the Covenant. It is from her that God took flesh. This is a unique case, with Christological and theological importance.

 

[Elkcreek]

The incarnation was ‘The’ most important and fantastic event in all of history since creation. Until the resurrection and our inevitable journey to the last day in history, Honestly to even go here is sophomoric, crude disrespectful and dumb. While Joseph was being visited by the higher angels repeatedly and in close company with the new ark of the covenant Mary) not to mention her uniqueness as a saint and holy individual this topic is in the worst of forms. The short answer is 'How should I know? and maybe its none of my business but given the insight we have into this incredible event only the Catholic Church can speak on it and only after centuries of insight revelation and holy tradition which by the way is something a lot of folks on this thread don’t buy into. Not to mention the repeated visitations of the blessed mother herself who has never manifested herself with anyone other than the incarnation. Protestants who actively assault this premise of ‘ever virgin’ will have some explaining to do when they meet our founder. Would not want to be in those shoes,

 

[Francis]

@Rosie11

https://www.ecatholic2000.com/agreda/vol1/vol1.shtml

762. The holy angels obeyed their Queen and, visible only to Her, stood in attendance. In this glorious company She spoke to her spouse saint Joseph, and said to him: “My lord and spouse, it is just that we give praise and glory with all reverence to our God and Creator, who is infinite in goodness and incomprehensible in his judgments. To us, who are so needy, He has manifested his greatness and mercy in choosing us for his service. I acknowledge myself among all creatures as more beholden and indebted to Him than all others, and more than all of them together; for, meriting less, I have received from his liberal hand more than they. At a tender age, being compelled thereto by the force of this truth, which, with the knowledge of the deceitfulness of visible things, his divine light made known to me, I consecrated myself to God by a perpetual vow of chastity in body and soul; his I am and Him I acknowledge as my Spouse and Lord, with fixed resolve to preserve for Him my chastity. I beseech thee, my master, to help me in fulfilling this vow, while in all other things I will be thy servant, willing to work for the comfort of thy life as long as mine shall last. Yield, my spouse, to this resolve and make a like resolve, in order that, offering ourselves as an acceptable sacrifice to our eternal God, He may receive us in the odor of sweetness and bestow on us the eternal goods for which we hope.”

763. The most chaste spouse Joseph, full of interior joy at the words of his heavenly Spouse, answered Her: “My Mistress, in making known to me thy chaste and welcome sentiments, thou hast penetrated and dilated my heart. I have not opened my thoughts to Thee before knowing thy own. I also acknowledge myself under greater obligation to the Lord of creation than other men; for very early He has called me by his true enlightenment to love Him with an upright heart; and I desire Thee to know, Lady that at the age of twelve years I also made a promise to serve the Most High in perpetual chastity. On this account I now gladly ratify this vow in order not to impede thy own; in the presence of his Majesty I promise to aid Thee, as far as in me lies, in serving Him and loving Him according to thy full desires. I will be, with the divine grace, thy most faithful servant and companion, and I pray Thee accept my chaste love and hold me as thy brother, without ever entertaining any other kind of love, outside the one which Thou owest to God and after God to me.” In this conversation the Most High confirmed anew the virtue of chastity in the heart of saint Joseph, and the pure and holy love due to his most holy spouse Mary. This love the saint already had in an eminent degree, and the Lady herself augmented it sweetly, dilating his heart by her most prudent discourse.