Mary and Joseph's Marriage: Consummation, Validity, and Perpetual Virginity

  • Thread starter Thread starter amicatholic2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
runningdude said:
Your premise is flawed; if you cannot have intercourse, there is simply no need to get married.

Again, this is a flawed premise. It is not strictly forbidden for a couple to live as brother and sister if not married.
Click to expand...
Does one only get married to have sex - read AGAIN what I said above, re the emotional attachment, the legality of being married. The belonging in the sight of the world as man and wife. To legally use the same name. To share a bed.

We do not wish to live as brother and sister - we do not have sibling feelings for each other, we wish to express our love in what ways we can. We could not kiss, hold hands, express endearments, if we lived as siblings.

We can marry civilly, we can marry in a Protestant church, but we cannot marry in a Catholic church.
 
runningdude said:
By settled, I mean specifically the Magisterium cannot pronounce otherwise.
Click to expand...
Correct. It is de fide. A divine revelation, a part of the Apostolic Deposit of Faith. The Magisterium of the Church has the duty to protect and safeguard this doctrine. It can NEVER be reversed.
 
Falco said:
The irony is - to have a non-consummated marriage, you have to be able to consummate, but choose not to. They will marry you, even knowing you do not intend to sleep together, as long as you could if you wanted to.
Click to expand...
The reason for this is sound. At any time, if one of the spouses chooses to consummate the marriage or to resume conjugal relations, the other spouse must agree. They consent to this ahead of time when permission for a Josephite marriage is granted. The consent to do this wouldn’t be worth anything if one of the couple *couldn’t *fulfill the marital act.
 
runningdude said:
By settled, I mean specifically the Magisterium cannot pronounce otherwise.
Click to expand...
The Vatican II council changed several elements in the church tradition. Discussions as in this forum are now allowed and acceptable.
The future view point of the church is being fronted by the Ecumenical movement with an objective of making a one world religion under one umbrella. To achieve this, the Magisterium might trade-in some traditional doctrines of the church so as to embrace the separated brothers.
The doctrine of perpetual virginity of Mary may remain unchanged, but it is a contentious aspect the separated brothers may wish to be ratified before they can accept to join the Catholic church.
 
Oska2 said:
The Vatican II council changed several elements in the church tradition. Discussions as in this forum are now allowed and acceptable.
The future view point of the church is being fronted by the Ecumenical movement with an objective of making a one world religion under one umbrella. To achieve this, the Magisterium might trade-in some traditional doctrines of the church so as to embrace the separated brothers.
The doctrine of perpetual virginity of Mary may remain unchanged, but it is a contentious aspect the separated brothers may wish to be ratified before they can accept to join the Catholic church.
Click to expand...
I don’t agree. I don’t believe you will find syncretism as part of the Catholic Church’s doctrine nor its intent.

There are liberals that believe syncretism is the answer to the strife between religious beliefs. But that is strictly a liberal concept, and not at all endorsed by the Church. Look at the 2000 year history of the Church. Has it EVER caved in to even the slightest variation from orthodoxy? No. Nor will it ever. 🙂

You claim Vatican II changed tradition. Maybe it DID change some traditional (small “t”) things; Like vernacular in the Mass. But it CAN NOT ever change Tradition (capital “T”) which is a part of Revelation. The perpetual virginity of the Mother of God is a part of Tradition (capital “T”) and thus a part of Divine Revelation.
 
AmbroseSJ said:
I don’t agree. I don’t believe you will find syncretism as part of the Catholic Church’s doctrine nor its intent.

There are liberals that believe syncretism is the answer to the strife between religious beliefs. But that is strictly a liberal concept, and not at all endorsed by the Church. Look at the 2000 year history of the Church. Has it EVER caved in to even the slightest variation from orthodoxy? No. Nor will it ever. 🙂
Click to expand...
You are speaking to a member of the Orthodox churches. They will point out the little thing about the Pope being infallible as a deviation from “orthodoxy”.

As to why he questions the orthodoxy of Mary, ever Virgin, I am uncertain, as I was under the impression the Orthodox hold this doctrine, too. This Source at least collaborates my impression.
 
AmbroseSJ said:
I don’t agree. I don’t believe you will find syncretism as part of the Catholic Church’s doctrine nor its intent.

There are liberals that believe syncretism is the answer to the strife between religious beliefs. But that is strictly a liberal concept, and not at all endorsed by the Church. Look at the 2000 year history of the Church. Has it EVER caved in to even the slightest variation from orthodoxy? No. Nor will it ever. 🙂

You claim Vatican II changed tradition. Maybe it DID change some traditional (small “t”) things; Like vernacular in the Mass. But it CAN NOT ever change Tradition (capital “T”) which is a part of Revelation. The perpetual virginity of the Mother of God is a part of Tradition (capital “T”) and thus a part of Divine Revelation.
Click to expand...
If there will be a Vatican III, which I see coming fast, matters of doctrine & practice will change drastically whether of Capital ‘T’ or small ‘t’.
In recent times there are emerging big challenges to the Church, and there will come a compromise. Not that they are the best for the Church but something will have to be done. Examples are ordination of women as priests, male priests being allowed to marry, and when the ball starts rolling, it will go far. The Anglican church has ordained homosexual priests, & US, a close friend of the Church is a strong proponent of the same.
I don’t want to be too speculative, but I’ll watch the turn of events.
 
Cyberseeker said:
Is there anything higher than “sainthood” that we can bestow on Joseph? :knight2:
Click to expand...
He was the custodian of Mary for as long as they lived together.
In heaven, he is near Mary as they lived together sharing sorrows and joys together.
Example is when they could not find a place to logde and were forced to share space with cows during the time of birth of Jesus. If Joseph was the ‘midwife’, it must have been a very hard time for him.
Bringing up a baby is also very challenging, though Jesus was special.
Also they ran to Egypt together to escape the wrath of Herod against baby Jesus. The experience of crossing the desert of Sinai and living in a foreign land must have been very enthralling.

If Joseph did all that and even more for Mary and did not consummate, then he deserves a higher position of sainthood.
 
The marriage of Joseph and Mary does not serve as a type for the sacrament of marriage between a man and a woman, where procreation and one-flesh union is the the behavior that would be typified.

Rather the marriage of Joseph and marriage is a type for the virginal orders of the church to follow in their own behavior. It is the type of marriage of monks and nuns and priests and bishops, where the consummation of union is strictly of a spiritual nature between themselves and God, rather than between each other.
It is a valid marriage in that sense, but not a valid marriage in the sense of serving as a type for the sacrament of marriage between a man and a woman.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top