Mary's other children

[NotWorthy]

Another interesting angle to the angel’s intervention is that Joseph was told to “fear not” to take Mary as his wife. Why would Joseph have had any fear? Fear for Mary’s life because of the exactions of the Mosaic law? Or fear that somehow, however inexplicably, she was untrue to their mutual promises of celibacy. If there had been a mutual consent on this score, (and there would have needed to have been), then Mary’s mysterious pregnancy which became noticeable after her return from her cousin Elizabeth’s would have been a source of incredible anguish to Joseph. Could Joseph have questioned Mary directly? It appears he never did. Could Mary have explained the situation?

The fact that Joseph was unable to question Mary would have been likely due to her always tangible and amazing holiness and humility. How could such a question be asked of such a one?

If they had not mutually promised celibacy to one another beforehand, than Mary’s question to the Angel Gabriel would have been unnecessary. Also Joseph would not have had any doubts about her pregnancy, and her faithfulness. He would have known one way or the other very easily, as he was a Just man. In fact the whole need for the Angel’s intervention would have been unnecessary.

I know there’s no proof for any of this, but there is also no proof to the contrary, and also seems somehow right, given the nature of the Holy Family.

I don’t think you need to reach so deep to find this answer. By Jewish Law, Joseph should have exposed her pregnancy, which would have caused Mary’s execution. Joseph did have an out, which would have meant quietly divorcing Mary and sending her away to a cousin to have the baby Jesus without the knowledge of their closer family and friends.

Joseph was thinking of the 2nd option, for it would allow Mary to live. But it would have meant Jesus was (in Jewish Law) a bastard. This would have prevented Him from being a child of David.

 

[NHInsider]

I agree with Cachonga on this issue.

I understand that Jesus is the son of David through His Adoption by Joseph. This is one of the reasons it was crucial for Joseph to stay with Mary, thus the angel’s intervention.

It has generally and traditionally been accepted that Mary was also of the Davidic line. It was, in fact, unusual for women to marry outside of their clans.

There has been extensive speculation on this question of why both gospel genealogies seem to end with Joseph, which anyone can explore if they’re fascinated. (start with Wikipedia and follow the footnotes . . .) Of all the profferred explanations I tend to side with the version that says Luke’s genealogy is Mary’s, not Joseph’s. . . .

As an aside, I would observe that even in my own personal genealogy over a span of only 300 years I have two places where I am descended from the same ancestor by through different branches (one a case of a man who had 14 children with a 20 year span among them, the eldest and the youngest being, effectively, in different generations although they had the same parents; the other a woman who married and had two children, was widowed, and later married a cousin of the first husband and had two more children . . . ). Over the same time frame my husband’s ancestry has four such intersections. Probably why it never occurred to me to question the above-cited tradition.

 

[NotWorthy]

It has generally and traditionally been accepted that Mary was also of the Davidic line. It was, in fact, unusual for women to marry outside of their clans.

There has been extensive speculation on this question of why both gospel genealogies seem to end with Joseph, which anyone can explore if they’re fascinated. (start with Wikipedia and follow the footnotes . . .) Of all the profferred explanations I tend to side with the version that says Luke’s genealogy is Mary’s, not Joseph’s. . . .

As an aside, I would observe that even in my own personal genealogy over a span of only 300 years I have two places where I am descended from the same ancestor by through different branches (one a case of a man who had 14 children with a 20 year span among them, the eldest and the youngest being, effectively, in different generations although they had the same parents; the other a woman who married and had two children, was widowed, and later married a cousin of the first husband and had two more children . . . ). Over the same time frame my husband’s ancestry has four such intersections. Probably why it never occurred to me to question the above-cited tradition.

Although I agree that Mary is of Davidic line, Matthew doesn’t show this.

For his Jewish audience, Matthew’s Gospel needs to stand on its own to convince the Jews that Jesus is the Son of David. His geneaology runs through Joseph, so I think Mary’s lineage is irrelevant to the fulfillment of the OT prophecies.