Question about Mary and Joseph

[CuriousCait]

Quick question: if Joseph and Mary were a formally married couple, why had they not consummated their marriage? The Church asserts that Mary was a virgin before, during, and after the birth of Christ, yes? What was the nature of her marriage to Joseph, then, that they had not had procreative intercourse? I know enough about history to realize that at this point in time, it was common practice for married couples to consummate right after the wedding.

Sorry if this is a silly question, but I’ve never read anything addressing this. Just curious,

-Cait

 

[eelpis]

I let St Thomas Aquinas answer this, from his summa theologica:
newadvent.org/summa/4029.htm

"Augustine says (De Consensu Evang. ii): “It cannot be allowed that the evangelist thought that Joseph ought to sever his union with Mary” (since he said that Joseph was Mary’s husband) “on the ground that in giving birth to Christ, she had not conceived of him, but remained a virgin. For by this example the faithful are taught that if after marriage they remain continent by mutual consent, their union is still and is rightly called marriage, even without intercourse of the sexes.”

I answer that, Marriage or wedlock is said to be true by reason of its attaining its perfection. Now perfection of anything is twofold; first, and second. The first perfection of a thing consists in its very form, from which it receives its species; while the second perfection of a thing consists in its operation, by which in some way a thing attains its end. Now the form of matrimony consists in a certain inseparable union of souls, by which husband and wife are pledged by a bond of mutual affection that cannot be sundered. And the end of matrimony is the begetting and upbringing of children: the first of which is attained by conjugal intercourse; the second by the other duties of husband and wife, by which they help one another in rearing their offspring.

Thus we may say, as to the first perfection, that the marriage of the Virgin Mother of God and Joseph was absolutely true: because both consented to the nuptial bond, but not expressly to the bond of the flesh, save on the condition that it was pleasing to God. For this reason the angel calls Mary the wife of Joseph, saying to him (Matthew 1:20): “Fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife”: on which words Augustine says (De Nup. et Concup. i): “She is called his wife from the first promise of her espousals, whom he had not known nor ever was to know by carnal intercourse.”

But as to the second perfection which is attained by the marriage act, if this be referred to carnal intercourse, by which children are begotten; thus this marriage was not consummated. Wherefore Ambrose says on Luke 1:26-27: “Be not surprised that Scripture calls Mary a wife. The fact of her marriage is declared, not to insinuate the loss of virginity, but to witness to the reality of the union.” Nevertheless, this marriage had the second perfection, as to upbringing of the child. Thus Augustine says (De Nup. et Concup. i): “All the nuptial blessings are fulfilled in the marriage of Christ’s parents, offspring, faith and sacrament. The offspring we know to have been the Lord Jesus; faith, for there was no adultery: sacrament, since there was no divorce. Carnal intercourse alone there was none.”

 

[Eucharisted]

Quick question: if Joseph and Mary were a formally married couple, why had they not consummated their marriage? The Church asserts that Mary was a virgin before, during, and after the birth of Christ, yes? What was the nature of her marriage to Joseph, then, that they had not had procreative intercourse? I know enough about history to realize that at this point in time, it was common practice for married couples to consummate right after the wedding.

Sorry if this is a silly question, but I’ve never read anything addressing this. Just curious,

-Cait

Mary was betrothed to Joseph, not yet married when she became pregnant with Jesus. And they never consummated the marriage for three reasons:

1. Mary had made a perpetual vow of virginity before marriage (something permitted under Mosaic law)
2. God had consummed the marriage Himself by giving Mary and Joseph a Child (the end of marital relations is twofold: pleasure of the spouses and procreation)
3. Mary and Joseph, because of Mary’s vow of virginity, lived a chaste married life - something which is not impossible at all when you look at the lives of many married couples who did the same (for example, the parents of Saint Theresa were chaste for ten years after they married)

 

[CuriousCait]

I see, thank you to both replies. That very articulately answers my question.

 

[thistle]

Mary was betrothed to Joseph, not yet married when she became pregnant with Jesus. And they never consummated the marriage for three reasons:

1. Mary had made a perpetual vow of virginity before marriage (something permitted under Mosaic law)
2. God had consummed the marriage Himself by giving Mary and Joseph a Child (the end of marital relations is twofold: pleasure of the spouses and procreation)
3. Mary and Joseph, because of Mary’s vow of virginity, lived a chaste married life - something which is not impossible at all when you look at the lives of many married couples who did the same (for example, the parents of Saint Theresa were chaste for ten years after they married)

That is not a fact and its not Scriptural. It is speculation based on the Protoevangelium of James ( a writing considered NOT to be inspired).

 

[eelpis]

That is not a fact and its not Scriptural. It is speculation based on the Protoevangelium of James ( a writing considered NOT to be inspired).

It’s actually founded on Mary’s response to the angel, "And Mary said to the angel: How shall this be done, because I know not man? "

This is what St Thomas writes:
newadvent.org/summa/4028.htm
Objection 1. It would seem that the Mother of God did not take a vow of virginity. For it is written (Deuteronomy 7:14): “No one shall be barren among you of either sex.” But sterility is a consequence of virginity. Therefore the keeping of virginity was contrary to the commandment of the Old Law. But before Christ was born the old law was still in force. Therefore at that time the Blessed Virgin could not lawfully take a vow of virginity.

Objection 2. Further, the Apostle says (1 Corinthians 7:25): “Concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord; but I give counsel.” But the perfection of the counsels was to take its beginning from Christ, who is the “end of the Law,” as the Apostle says (Romans 10:4). It was not therefore becoming that the Virgin should take a vow of virginity.

Objection 3. Further, the gloss of Jerome says on 1 Timothy 5:12, that “for those who are vowed to virginity, it is reprehensible not only to marry, but also to desire to be married.” But the Mother of Christ committed no sin for which she could be reprehended, as stated above (Question 27, Article 4). Since therefore she was “espoused,” as related by Luke 1:27 it seems that she did not take a vow of virginity.

On the contrary, Augustine says (De Sanct. Virg. iv): “Mary answered the announcing angel: ‘How shall this be done, because I know not man?’ She would not have said this unless she had already vowed her virginity to God.”

I answer that, As we have stated in the II-II, 88, 6, works of perfection are more praiseworthy when performed in fulfilment of a vow. Now it is clear that for reasons already given (1,2,3) virginity had a special place in the Mother of God. It was therefore fitting that her virginity should be consecrated to God by vow. Nevertheless because, while the Law was in force both men and women were bound to attend to the duty of begetting, since the worship of God was spread according to carnal origin, until Christ was born of that people; the Mother of God is not believed to have taken an absolute vow of virginity, before being espoused to Joseph, although she desired to do so, yet yielding her own will to God’s judgment. Afterwards, however, having taken a husband, according as the custom of the time required, together with him she took a vow of virginity.

Reply to Objection 1. Because it seemed to be forbidden by the law not to take the necessary steps for leaving a posterity on earth, therefore the Mother of God did not vow virginity absolutely, but under the condition that it were pleasing to God. When, however, she knew that it was acceptable to God, she made the vow absolute, before the angel’s Annunciation.

Reply to Objection 2. Just as the fulness of grace was in Christ perfectly, yet some beginning of the fulness preceded in His Mother; so also the observance of the counsels, which is an effect of God’s grace, began its perfection in Christ, but was begun after a fashion in His Virgin Mother.

Reply to Objection 3. These words of the Apostle are to be understood of those who vow chastity absolutely. Christ’s Mother did not do this until she was espoused to Joseph. After her espousals, however, by their common consent she took a vow of virginity together with her spouse.

 

[thistle]

It’s actually founded on Mary’s response to the angel, "And Mary said to the angel: How shall this be done, because I know not man? "

This is what St Thomas writes:
newadvent.org/summa/4028.htm
Objection 1. It would seem that the Mother of God did not take a vow of virginity. For it is written (Deuteronomy 7:14): “No one shall be barren among you of either sex.” But sterility is a consequence of virginity. Therefore the keeping of virginity was contrary to the commandment of the Old Law. But before Christ was born the old law was still in force. Therefore at that time the Blessed Virgin could not lawfully take a vow of virginity.

Objection 2. Further, the Apostle says (1 Corinthians 7:25): “Concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord; but I give counsel.” But the perfection of the counsels was to take its beginning from Christ, who is the “end of the Law,” as the Apostle says (Romans 10:4). It was not therefore becoming that the Virgin should take a vow of virginity.

Objection 3. Further, the gloss of Jerome says on 1 Timothy 5:12, that “for those who are vowed to virginity, it is reprehensible not only to marry, but also to desire to be married.” But the Mother of Christ committed no sin for which she could be reprehended, as stated above (Question 27, Article 4). Since therefore she was “espoused,” as related by Luke 1:27 it seems that she did not take a vow of virginity.

On the contrary, Augustine says (De Sanct. Virg. iv): “Mary answered the announcing angel: ‘How shall this be done, because I know not man?’ She would not have said this unless she had already vowed her virginity to God.”

I answer that, As we have stated in the II-II, 88, 6, works of perfection are more praiseworthy when performed in fulfilment of a vow. Now it is clear that for reasons already given (1,2,3) virginity had a special place in the Mother of God. It was therefore fitting that her virginity should be consecrated to God by vow. Nevertheless because, while the Law was in force both men and women were bound to attend to the duty of begetting, since the worship of God was spread according to carnal origin, until Christ was born of that people; the Mother of God is not believed to have taken an absolute vow of virginity, before being espoused to Joseph, although she desired to do so, yet yielding her own will to God’s judgment. Afterwards, however, having taken a husband, according as the custom of the time required, together with him she took a vow of virginity.

Reply to Objection 1. Because it seemed to be forbidden by the law not to take the necessary steps for leaving a posterity on earth, therefore the Mother of God did not vow virginity absolutely, but under the condition that it were pleasing to God. When, however, she knew that it was acceptable to God, she made the vow absolute, before the angel’s Annunciation.

Reply to Objection 2. Just as the fulness of grace was in Christ perfectly, yet some beginning of the fulness preceded in His Mother; so also the observance of the counsels, which is an effect of God’s grace, began its perfection in Christ, but was begun after a fashion in His Virgin Mother.

Reply to Objection 3. These words of the Apostle are to be understood of those who vow chastity absolutely. Christ’s Mother did not do this until she was espoused to Joseph. After her espousals, however, by their common consent she took a vow of virginity together with her spouse.

I fully agree about Mary’s perpetual virginity but I see nothing in Scripture (including what you have quoted) which shows she took an actual vow of any kind.

 

[eelpis]

I fully agree about Mary’s perpetual virginity but I see nothing in Scripture (including what you have quoted) which shows she took an actual vow of any kind.

Sacred scripture is not the only source for revelation, we also have the oral teachings of the apostles contained in Holy Tradition.

Tradition is unanimous in claiming that Mary indeed took a vow of virginity.

Other teachings that are not explicitly in the bible are the Trinity, the Assumption etc.

 

[RyanML]

I fully agree about Mary’s perpetual virginity but I see nothing in Scripture (including what you have quoted) which shows she took an actual vow of any kind.

The traditions about Our Lady in the Protoevangelium of James are highly respected by Christians of the east while not all that well known in the west. These writings may not be the inspired Word, but it is certainly permissible for Catholics to believe them. God bless!

 

[Genesis315]

Such situations where spouses live as brother and sister are called Josephite marriages after St. Joseph. I’m not sure if that helps at all though with your question.

 

[barb_finnegan]

Eucharisted-just a little correction about St. Therese’s parents (now declared ‘Blessed’ by the Church in October): their period of chastity after marriage was ten MONTHS, not YEARS. It took the counsel of a confessor to change their marital life.

 

[Genesis315]

As for Mary’s vowed virginity, the Church celebrates her Presentation at the Temple in memory of her consecration as a child.

 

[bpbasilphx]

It is an old tradition of the Church that little Mariam had vowed virginity while in the Temple. To protect her vow, a pro-forma betrothal was arranged with Joseph, a righteous and older widower.

 

[thistle]

It is an old tradition of the Church that little Mariam had vowed virginity while in the Temple. To protect her vow, a pro-forma betrothal was arranged with Joseph, a righteous and older widower.

I repeat that is only in the Protoevangelium of James and is not accepted by the Church as an inspired writing.

 

[thistle]

Sacred scripture is not the only source for revelation, we also have the oral teachings of the apostles contained in Holy Tradition.

Tradition is unanimous in claiming that Mary indeed took a vow of virginity.

Other teachings that are not explicitly in the bible are the Trinity, the Assumption etc.

Please tell me where tradition is unanimous in claiming Mary took a vow of virginity.
She was perpetually a virgin. No dispute there (that is dogma) but show me where she took an actual vow of virginity. The Church teaches Mary was ever virgin but does not teach she took an actual vow.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

It is an old tradition of the Church that little Mariam had vowed virginity while in the Temple. To protect her vow, a pro-forma betrothal was arranged with Joseph, a righteous and older widower.

This is indeed an old tradition, though in the opinion of many Doctors of the Church and Saints, erroneous. Saint Joseph by yet another long and old tradition is esteemed to have been a perpetual virgin along with his Virginal spouse. This tradition witnesses to a Holy Family that was an earthly and virginal trinity, just as the Most Holy Trinity itself is. This is too much for many to swallow, and so be it.

 

[Jacafamala]

Please tell me where tradition is unanimous in claiming Mary took a vow of virginity.
She was perpetually a virgin. No dispute there (that is dogma) but show me where she took an actual vow of virginity. The Church teaches Mary was ever virgin but does not teach she took an actual vow.

If she remained a virgin (and of course she did), then it would only stand to figure that she took a vow of virginity, and you are splitting hairs here.

 

[Lujack]

If she remained a virgin (and of course she did), then it would only stand to figure that she took a vow of virginity, and you are splitting hairs here.

Not that I’ve ever really worried about it that much (She was perpetually virgin, and that’s good enough for me), I think the hair-splitting is not over whether or not she took a vow, but when she took a vow. I think many people simply assume that the vow and decision to remain perpetually virgin was made after the Annunciation, not in her youth.

Again, I don’t really about it that much, and certainly haven’t researched it at all.

 

[Timothysis]

Please tell me where tradition is unanimous in claiming Mary took a vow of virginity.
She was perpetually a virgin. No dispute there (that is dogma) but show me where she took an actual vow of virginity. The Church teaches Mary was ever virgin but does not teach she took an actual vow.

I agree with thistle. “Tradition” sometimes says things that we know either aren’t correct or has no basis in statement. Many saints have been culled from the calender for lack of historical evidence even though “Tradition” speaks of them (i.e. Veroncia, Cicillia, St. George).

That Mary was a perpetual virgin is certain. Indeed, as thistle notes, it is a dogma of the Church. Yet this statement about Joseph being picked as Mary’s spouse with the understanding of a non-sexual relationship has no more basis in fact than saying that Mary took a vow of perpetual virginity.

The Church itself does not even teach the idea of the “consecrated virgin” any more than they teach that Mary actually died before her Assumption or not. It is left to the faithful but there really is very little to suggest this. Why not spend your time reflecting on things that we do know for certain instead of unfounded speculation?

 

[eelpis]

St Thomas Aquinas the common doctor of the Church says she did. That’s enough evidence for me. But I guess that modern man deems himself so much smarter.