Mary: no relations with Joseph?

[pprimeau1976]

Timidity:

Yes. The Protoevaglium of James dates to 100-130.

(By the way, “AD” comes before the year, not after.)

Before and not after…got it. Mea Maxima Culpa

 

[Scott_Waddell]

pprimeau1976:

I guess my question to you is how do you know what God wants us to know? Do you hold the position that the church has no authority to make such a teaching because it is not written? Even the Gospel of John states that there were so many things that Jesus said and did that was not written down. Should we then just abandon these beliefs then? If so, the Trinity would be in jeopardy as well.

Yes, these Solomon-like pronouncements from Superpope YAQUBOS down to us mere mortals make me realize my unworthiness. Thus he is on my ignore list lest I turn into a pillar of salt by looking.

Scott

 

[Greg_McPherran]

Hello,

Timidity:

This is covered in other threads, as well as the CA site itself. I’ll take the easy way and quote Bishop Challoner from the mid-18th century: …to denote by the word until, only what is done, without any regard to the future…

What, then, is the purpose of the statement about Mary’s virginity “until” Jesus was born? Scripture does not state that she was a virgin for life, but rather indicates “until” Jesus was born. What is the purpose of this?

Greg

 

[Thepeug]

Della:

No man had the right to use her body for himself, this is why Joseph hesitated to take Mary as his wife, not because he thought she had sinned.
QUOTE]

Della,

Thanks for your explanation. I must say, I agree with everything except the above statement. Consider the following from Matthew 1:19: Upon learning that Mary was pregnant, “her husband Joseph, being a righteous man and unwilling to expose her to public disgrace, planned to dismiss her quietly.”

Such a statement clearly connotes that Mary was a virgin, and that Joseph, unaware of her conception via the Holy Spirit, did not know how she could be pregnant, except by another man. He was “unwilling to expose her to public disgrace” because, though suspecting that she had been unfaithful, he cared for her and didn’t want to see her shamed. This doesn’t have anything to do with the fact that he felt he had no right to her sexually.

In Christ,

Chris

 

[Timidity]

Greg_McPherran:

What, then, is the purpose of the statement about Mary’s virginity “until” Jesus was born? Scripture does not state that she was a virgin for life, but rather indicates “until” Jesus was born. What is the purpose of this?

Did you read the full quote?

 

[Thomas2]

How about this analogy to the “until” arguement -

Thomas2 is a Camel smoker and has suddenly given up smoking! It has been said that she never smoked another Camel until the day she died! Does this mean that Thomas2 sat up during the funeral Mass and lit up a Camel? Sorry, I just had to laugh about this.

What I should say is that the Church has always believed and taught that Mary was a perpetual virgin and that in this way she glorified God, not only after the Annunciation and birth of our Lord, but in her life before as well. Temple virgins were important to the Jews back then as are those who’ve consecrated themselves in the Church since and remain virgins for the sake of the Kingdom of God. As for the argument that Jesus had brothers and sisters, there are basically two ways of resolving the issue, although for the most part today, we only hear about the “cousins” line of reasoning. These are that the “brothers and sisters” of Jesus mentioned were actually other kin and there being no Hebrew word to discribe the relationship, they were simply grouped under the broad category of brothers and sisters. But there is another line of reasoning that goes like this: Joseph was an older man and a widower and since he had children and a household that needed tending, he applied to the temple to take one of its virgins into his home as his wife, yet she would remain a virgin. This way the needs of his household would be provided for, and by bringing Mary into his home as his wife, he would be freeing her from the danger of a less suitable marriage. Please read St. Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 7:36-38. This being said, then the children of Joseph and his first wife could well be considered the brothers and sisters of Jesus, even though there was no blood bond.

Peace and all good,

Thomas2

P.S. “…the virgin shall be with child, and bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel…” Isaiah 7:14

 

[CatholicMatthew]

Thepeug:

How, though, does one explain the following: Matthew 1:24-25 (NSRV): “When Joseph awoke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him; he took her as his wife, but had no marital relations with her until she had borne a son; and he named him Jesus.” “Marital relations” usually refers to sexual intercourse, and “until” umplies that such relations did eventually occur after Jesus was born. Perhaps “virginity” in reference to Mary concerns more her purity of spirit than the presence of a hymen?

1.) If you were engaged and someone/something appeared to you and said you were going to have a child what would you say? Ok, I am getting married…I will have sex with my husband and ta da. However, Mary was suprised…this was due to the fact that her and Joseph were planning on a celibate marriage.
2.) Mk 6:3 The son of Mary not A Son of Mary (not terribly definitive but hey)
3.) Jn 19:26 Mary the Mother entrusted to John not some other mystery sibling.
4.) In terms of until read the following usages of until

a) Mt 28:20 I am with you always, until end of age
b) 1 Tim 4:13 until I arrive, attend to reading, teaching…
c) Lk 1:80 John in desert until day of his manifestation

We have no problem realizing that until in these contexts allow and promote the idea of continued occurence after the event.

Under the Mercy,

Matthew

 

[AlanFromWichita]

YAQUBOS:

I don’t see where is the importance of such a topic. Please, can you tell me what will this add to our life with the Lord?

“Therefore if you have been raised up with Christ, keep seeking the things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God.
Set your mind on the things above, not on the things that are on earth.” ( Colossians 3:1-2 )

I agree. It is interesting to learn about the culture and customs such as what words mean and the betrothal customs.

What I don’t get is why Catholicism is so interested in this. I don’t blame the OP for asking, because what is taught doesn’t sound like what is in the Bible, and is often asked about by Protestants. It strikes me as kind of strange, though, that holy and pious men, for centuries, have argued about the the private lives of Mary and Joseph. OK, so I can buy that it was important before Jesus was born to establish that His birth was given by God. After Jesus was born, though, what does it matter?

As Catholics we are bombarded with reminders of Mary’s perpetual virginity. I’m sorry, but I find it a bit repulsive because one time when I was very manic and undergoing a great deal of spiritual warfare, I was at Mass and when I heard the word “virgin” repeated during the sermon my mind conjured up an unspeakable image that has to do with the meaning of that word. Since then I occasionally am reminded by it whenever I hear about Mary ever virgin. Why don’t we simply call Her the Mother of our Lord? Why don’t we refer to “Jesus ever virgin” whenever we talk about Him, if virginity is so important we have to be constantly reminded of it? Does anyone else agree with me that it is odd to condemn popular culture with being obsessed with sex when we constantly focus on whether Jesus’ parents had any?

Alan

 

[Greg_McPherran]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg_McPherran
What, then, is the purpose of the statement about Mary’s virginity “until” Jesus was born? Scripture does not state that she was a virgin for life, but rather indicates “until” Jesus was born. What is the purpose of this?

Timidity:

Did you read the full quote?

Yes, I understand the use of the word until as described. However, are we to understand that “until she had borne a son” only needs to specify until Jesus was born, since it is obvious that she would remain a virgin after He was born? In other words, the phrase “until she had borne a son” assumes that it is obvious that she would remain a virgin afterwards? Just as in your examples it was obvious that after the specified “until time”, the statements still applied.

Also, in Mathew 2:13 we see the use of the word “until” being used as we commonly think of it:

Mathew 2:13 When they had departed, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, "Rise, take the child and his mother, flee to Egypt, and stay there until I tell you.

How are we to know which meaning of the word “until” is intended? I would think that your described use of “until” would only make sense if it were obvious that Mary would remain a virgin after Jesus was born, in which case it would not need to be explained anyway. Is it obvious that Mary would remain a virgin after Jesus’ birth?

I can readily believe that God willed for Mary to center her life on Jesus and only Jesus. I think the awesomeness of being the Mother of the Messiah is complete fulfillment and an overflowing vocation. It makes sense to me that she remained a virgin and since the Church teaches it, I believe it. Besides, it is not my personal opinion that matters anyway.

I still have a question. If it is obvious that Mary would remain a virgin after Jesus’ birth then why would Scripture tell us that she remained a virgin before His birth?

Greg

 

[Greg_McPherran]

Continued…

For example, using the word “until” as you have described: If I say “We kept our coats on so no one was cold until the heat came on”, it is clear that no one was cold after the heat came on since they were trying to stay warm while waiting for the heat to come on. In that case there was only a question of being cold before the heat came on and not after. So it makes sense to explain how they were not cold before the heat came on.

By the same logic, if “until she had borne a son” is telling us that Mary was a virgin before Jesus was born, this would seem to mean that there is some signifigance of her virginity before His birth that Scripture is pointing out. I think the signifigance is that Jesus was not conceived by a human father. I think perhaps the point of the passage is to teach the incarnation and it is not a general statement about Mary’s perpetual virginity. The passage simply does not address Mary’s perpetual virginity because that is not its purpose. So to relate this passage to her perpetual virginity or try to show that it implies that she wasn’t a virgin after Jesus’ birth is in error. Again, that is because the focus of the passage is that Jesus’ Father is God, not whether Mary was a virgin for life.

So it does make sense that the phrase “until she had borne a son” does not imply that she was not a virgin after His birth.

This is a good example of how we must be careful to understand the meanings of Scripture passages.

Thank you, I understand now.

Greg

 

[prodromos]

All Matthew wants to tell us is that Jesus was not conceived through sexual intercourse, nothing more. To insist that “until” implies that Joseph and Mary had sexual relations, is to suggest that Matthew is giving us intimate details of Joseph and Mary’s relationship which have absolutely no bearing on the Gospel, and I don’t believe the Gospels are noted for having a lot of unimportant or unnecessary details.

John.

 

[Scott_Waddell]

AlanFromWichita:

What I don’t get is why Catholicism is so interested in this.

Because it’s true. If someone finds it repulsive it says more about them than the teaching itself.

Scott

 

[Della]

Della,

Thanks for your explanation. I must say, I agree with everything except the above statement. Consider the following from Matthew 1:19: Upon learning that Mary was pregnant, “her husband Joseph, being a righteous man and unwilling to expose her to public disgrace, planned to dismiss her quietly.”

Such a statement clearly connotes that Mary was a virgin, and that Joseph, unaware of her conception via the Holy Spirit, did not know how she could be pregnant, except by another man. He was “unwilling to expose her to public disgrace” because, though suspecting that she had been unfaithful, he cared for her and didn’t want to see her shamed. This doesn’t have anything to do with the fact that he felt he had no right to her sexually.

In Christ,

Chris

Hi Chris!

Actually, this verse says nothing about what Joseph knew nor his attitude towards her. What it does tell us is that he was considering divorcing her (betrothals were more than our mere engagements in that culture), but he didn’t want to expose Mary to the public shame of a divorce, especially considering she was pregnant, so that people would assume she had sinned. Joseph was thinking of Mary’s reputation and her standing in their culture not that she had sinned. He knew she had not had relations with another man, but he wasn’t sure what to make of the situation, either nor what he should do about it, that’s all. The angel assured him that he need not set her aside for she had conceived of the Holy Spirit. We don’t know if the angel was confirming what Mary had told him and he hadn’t been able to take in or if this was news to him, in either case, it is only speculation that Joseph thought Mary had sinned. The Bible doesn’t tell us that and the Church says through Sacred Tradition that he didn’t, so that is why we understand that their marriage was a celibate one–because of the great respect for Mary and piety he had as a “righteous man”.

Della

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Scott Waddell:

Because it’s true. If someone finds it repulsive it says more about them than the teaching itself.

So just because it is true, we have to reflect on it?

If we did enough research, we might also learn that Mary went to the bathroom occasionally. If that turns out to be true, do you think that it should be remembered at every Mass simply because it is true, and that anyone who is repulsed by hearing of it has a problem?

Would you like it if your mother’s sexual behavior were thoroughly examined and proclaimed daily around the world for thousands of years? If not, why would we think Jesus likes it? Should we not leave his mother as much dignity and privacy as we would wish for our own? How does our harping on this issue differ from gossip?

Maybe you’re right that it says more about me that I am repulsed than about the teaching itself. Maybe it says that I think there is such a thing as “too much information” and that there is such a thing as decency.

Alan

 

[Apologia100]

Greg_McPherran:

Hello,

What, then, is the purpose of the statement about Mary’s virginity “until” Jesus was born? Scripture does not state that she was a virgin for life, but rather indicates “until” Jesus was born. What is the purpose of this?

Greg

The purpose is to clearly state that Joseph had no part in the procreation of Jesus.

**Gen 26:13 ** “and he gain more anad more every day until he became very wealthy.” Does that mean to imply that as soon as he became very wealthy he stopped gaining?
**Gen 28:15 ** “Behold, I am with you and will keep you wherever you go, and will bring you back to this land; for I will not leave you until I have done that of which I have spoken to you.” So, as soon as God does what He promised to Jacob, He is going to leave him?
Gen 41:49 “And Joseph stored up grain in great abundance, like the sand of the sea, until he ceased to measure it, for it could not be measured.” So as soon as Joseph stopped measuring the grain, he also stopped collecting it?
1 Sam 12:2 “And now, behold, the king walks before you; and I am old and gray, and behold, my sons are with you; and I have walked before you from my youth **until ** this day.” Does that mean that from the day Saul told this to David he would no longer walk with him?
1 Sam 15:35 “And Samuel did not see Saul again until the day of his death, but Samuel grieved over Saul. And the LORD repented that he had made Saul king over Israel.” Does that mean that Samuel saw Saul after the day of his death?
Psalm 112:8 “His heart is steady, he will not be afraid, until he sees his desire on his adversaries.” Does this mean that after he sees his desires on his adversaries, his heart will become afraid and unsteady?
**1 Cor 15:25 ** “For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.” Does that mean that as soon as soon as all of Jesus’ enemies are under His feet, He will no longer reign?
James 5:7 “Be patient, therefore, brethren, until the coming of the Lord.” Does that mean that as soon as the Lord returns, we can become impatient?

 

[Thepeug]

Della:

Actually, this verse says nothing about what Joseph knew nor his attitude towards her…He knew she had not had relations with another man, but he wasn’t sure what to make of the situation…

Both of us are clearly speculating about what Joseph knew and didn’t know concerning Mary’s pregnancy.

In regards to “until,” many of you have demonstrated that this word can have different meanings within different contexts. I’m of the opinion that, within the context of Matthew 1:24-25, “until” denotes a finite point and not a continuation.

That said, I have to agree with Podromos and Alan: Scripture tells us what we need to know (in this case, that Jesus was incarnated by the Spirit) and leaves the other details to our imagination because they are ultimately unimportant.

In Christ,

Chris

 

[Scott_Waddell]

AlanFromWichita:

So just because it is true, we have to reflect on it?

If we did enough research, we might also learn that Mary went to the bathroom occasionally. If that turns out to be true, do you think that it should be remembered at every Mass simply because it is true, and that anyone who is repulsed by hearing of it has a problem?

Would you like it if your mother’s sexual behavior were thoroughly examined and proclaimed daily around the world for thousands of years? If not, why would we think Jesus likes it? Should we not leave his mother as much dignity and privacy as we would wish for our own? How does our harping on this issue differ from gossip?

Maybe you’re right that it says more about me that I am repulsed than about the teaching itself. Maybe it says that I think there is such a thing as “too much information” and that there is such a thing as decency.

Alan

If it pertains to the divinity or our faith in Christ, then yes, we do have to reflect upon it. All Marian dogmas are ultimately about Christ. In the case of perpetual virginity, there is Mary as the Ark of the New Covenant which is Jesus. Also, it defends Jesus as the true davidic king from fuzzy thinking like, since Jesus died maybe one of his brothers is the actual king.

There is nothing crass about Mary ever-virgin, and there is certainly nothing arbitrary about it. The only reason it there is “harping on” it is because people attack it and try to use it as disproof of Catholic doctrines.

Scott

 

[Greg_McPherran]

Hi Apologia,

Apologia100:

The purpose is to clearly state that Joseph had no part in the procreation of Jesus.

Yes, I agree and understand. That’s why I also realize that it cannot be interpreted to imply that Mary was not a perpetual virgin.

Thank You,
Greg

 

[Thepeug]

Scott Waddell:

If it pertains to the divinity or our faith in Christ, then yes, we do have to reflect upon it…In the case of perpetual virginity, there is Mary as the Ark of the New Covenant which is Jesus. Also, it defends Jesus as the true davidic king from fuzzy thinking like, since Jesus died maybe one of his brothers is the actual king.

That’s just it: whether or not Mary ever had sex in no way increases or decreases my faith in Christ as Savior and Redeemer.

I also don’t understand your argument relating virginity to the Ark. Mary is the Ark by virtue of the fact that she carried Jesus in her womb, not because she was a virgin.

Your comment about the Davidic line also raises a question I’ve been meaning to ask: if the line descends through Joseph, yet Joseph was not Jesus’ biological father, how is Jesus part of the Davidic line?

God bless,

Chris

 

[Mary2004]

Scott Waddell:

Yes, these Solomon-like pronouncements from Superpope YAQUBOS down to us mere mortals make me realize my unworthiness. Thus he is on my ignore list lest I turn into a pillar of salt by looking.

Scott

====
Scott, maybe the question troubled him and he believes that it’s wrong to not to blindly accept what we’ve been taught.