Mary And Joseph...living In Sin?

[ICTHUS]

Someone on another website (CGR) said......

[quote]Also interestingly enough, in another thread one of the Catholic participants was talking about annulling a marriage and how and why it could be done. It was stated that for a marriage to be a true marriage in the Catholic church , it had to be intended for procreation. Well, if Joseph never " knew" Mary and they lived together for at least 12 years, then they had no true marriage according to the Catholic church and thus lived in sin.[/quote]

[Aloysius]

take out the word "intended" and put in "open to" and then add at the end "if they are to having sex"

a Catholic can only participate in sex if it is open to new life. if a marriage is never consummated, it may or may not be a real marriage. but if a marriage is consumated but completely closed to life, it may be unlawful.

Mary and Joseph never consumated, but their marriage was completely valid. They didn't have sex, so there was no way for them to commit the sin of closing sex from the possibility of life.

[phatcatholic]

the key is "openness to life"

in our day, and in the normative sense, this means procreation

in the case of Mary and Joseph, who can be more open to life then the Mother of our Lord? she consented to the Holy Spirit so that life may be formed in her, even though she knew not man. and this was no ordinary life, but the life of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. she could have refused this creation, as we do today thru abortion and the use of contraceptives. but she did not.

Joseph is likewise abundantly open to life. He could have dismissed his wife, and the child she was bearing. he could have ignored the vision in his dream and closed himself off from the lives of both Mary and her Son. but instead, he was open to how the Holy Spirit was working w/in her, and accepting of the life that would be created.

together, they were abundantly faithful to Him who IS LIFE. there is no greater openness to life and no greater marriage then the one that exists within the Holy Family.

pax christi,
phatcatholic

[ICTHUS]

But if they were open to life within their marriage, shouldn't they have had sex? That's what the person, I think originally wanted to say.

[phatcatholic]

not necessarily.

for one, sex is not the only way we show our openenss to life. the sex act of an impotent couple would not reveal their openness to life, b/c it would not result in procreation. in this case, it is their inner disposition that reveals their openenss.

also, sex is the only way that [b][i]we feeble human beings[/i][/b] can become "one flesh" and mirror the intimate unity of the trinity in which the love between two persons make a third person. however, mary did not have to rely on the sex act to mirror this unity b/c she had a more perfect way. the Holy Spirit was her spouse. He joined himself perfectly with her and created the Son. sexual unity between man and woman pales in comparison to the unity mary experienced. it would have been a disgrace to the Holy Spirit to engage in sexual relations after experiencing such a bond with God.

then, when you get into the whole "no man shall enter the gate from which the Lord entered" (Eze 44:2) and how sinners were not even allowed to touch the ark of the covenant, it all just makes sense.

pax christi,
phatcatholic

[StColette]

"Well, if Joseph never " knew" Mary and they lived together for at least 12 years, then they had no true marriage according to the Catholic church and thus lived in sin."

As an Bible knowledgable person should know, God gave Mary to Joseph. Joseph was to be the guardian over Mary and Jesus. They should remember in the Gospel of Matthew an angel of the Lord came unto Joseph and said:

Mt:1:20-24
20 But while he thought on these things, behold the Angel of the Lord appeared to him in his sleep, saying: Joseph, son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife, for that which is conceived in her, is of the Holy Ghost. (DRV)
21 And she shall bring forth a son: and thou shalt call his name Jesus. For he shall save his people from their sins.
22 Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled which the Lord spoke by the prophet, saying:
23 Behold a virgin shall be with child, and bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
24 And Joseph rising up from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord had commanded him, and took unto him his wife.

By reading these verses it is clearly stated that God gave his permission for Joseph to take Mary into his house.

"But if they were open to life within their marriage, shouldn't they have had sex? That's what the person, I think originally wanted to say. "

Simple answer to this is that Mary is the spouse of the Holy Spirit. It has been written so for many many years. In prayers of St. Louis de Montfort and in prayers to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. It is also shown that Mary is the spouse of the Holy Spirit in one of the encyclicals of Pope Leo XIII:

14. ... Unite, then, Venerable Brethren, your prayers with Ours, and at your exhortation let all Christian peoples add their prayers also, invoking the powerful and ever-acceptable intercession of the Blessed Virgin. You know well the intimate and wonderful relations existing between her and the Holy Ghost, so that she is justly called His Spouse. The intercession of the Blessed Virgin was of great avail both in the mystery of the Incarnation and in the coming of the Holy Ghost upon the Apostles. ...

DIVINUM ILLUD MUNUS, ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO XIII ON THE HOLY SPIRIT, MAY 9, 1897.

It is yet another unique union that the Blessed Virgin has with the Trinity. Daughter of God, the Father, Mother of God the Son, and Spouse of the Holy Spirit. And the Blessed Virgin being the person that she is kept her vow to the Holy Spirit and stayed a virgin even after the birth of Jesus.

Hope this help!

St Colette

[phatcatholic]

also, one thing i just realized....

isn't a "betrothal" different from a marriage?

i always understood a betrothal as an agreement by a man to take a woman into his home and protect her. it seems to lack the sexual expectation of a marriage, where you have two becoming one and love communicated through the act of procreation.

the protoevangelium of james says that after mary was too old to reside in the temple, they casted lots among the elderly widowed men to see who would take her in. of course, Joseph won. this arrangment seems to be altogether different from a marriage.

is that right?

holla back,
phatcatholic

[StColette]

A betrothal is the same thing as getting engaged in the present.

A betrothal by definition means "a mutual promise to marry"

but they were not allowed to live together until they were validly married. During the time period we are speaking of in the Gospels you would not find a man and a woman living together who were not married. As it is evident that even when Mary was found to be with child she was still living with her parents.

But you are correct about the casting of lots in order to find someone to watch over Mary and to become her husband.

[crusader1234]

Like phatcatholic mentioned, sort of anwyays, Mary and Joseph werent married at the time. Mary and Joseph were 'engaged' I guess you could say. I was also unaware that they were living together? I do know, however, that it is currently a custom in India and places in the Middle East that the bride goes and lives with the in-laws. So, it makes sense that 90 years ago, even if Mary did live with Joseph, this was just tradition. Keep in mind, too, that at the time there werent the Church laws, as they were Jewish.

[StColette]

Correct you do have to keep in mind Jewish tradition in this period. Which would be far harsher than that of the Church' laws. During that time period if a woman were to be found with child out of wedlock she would have been stoned to death. So keeping that in mind it is highly unlikely that Mary and Joseph would be living together if they were not married, betrothed or not betrothed.

[Jake Huether]

Also, we must note that Mary and Joseph were not Sacramentally married, as Jesus had not yet instituted the Sacrament. Therefore, they were nut under the same "annulment / divorce / etc." stipulations that were are now under. They were under the Old Coventant Jewish law. And I'm sure it wouldn't be to diffucult to find out what the conditions were then for a "valid" marriage.

[ICTHUS]

Well, one of them was CONSUMNATION of the marriage, Jake.

[Aloysius]

it was common practice for women to consecrate themselves as virgens in the temple. common Christian writings tell us Mary was one of these virgins but the high priest sent them all away. fearing God he knew he couldn't make Mary break her vow to God, he also could not sustain her in the temple and sending her out on the streets alone would've been like a death sentence, so he chose someone of her same house: the house of David, to take her into his home. They were betrothed to live together, there was never any intention of consumating the marriage.

This is of course just writings of a few loyal Christians in the 3rd and 4th centuries Anno Domini, but it is not to be taken lightly seeing as they lived way closer in time and area to the culture Mary lived in than we do nowadays, so they had more of an idea what they were talking about. these were stories that had been told from Christian to Christian for centuries i'm sure, and they were simply collected in these 3rd and 4th century writings. those with the line of the Apostles did not refute the claims. I believe these stories are a very likely explanation for what was going on. I do believe I can say beyound a shadow of a doubt that Mary had taken an oath of virginity, seeing as she said "how can this be, since i KNOW NOT MAN?" obviously, if she was betrothed to joseph and intending to consumate with him, why would she not assume this is how it was to happen? i believe Luke knew of Mary's vow of virginity, probably he learned of it from John or one of John's disciples, but Luke didn't write of it as he was writing a story about Jesus and the Holy Spirit was respecting Mary's wishes to remain humble and unknown at the time.

pAx

[Apotheoun]

[quote]Well, one of them was CONSUMNATION of the marriage, Jake.[/quote]

Mary and Joseph had what is called a ratified marriage (matrimonium ratum), and not a ratified and consummated marriage (matrimonium ratum et consummatum), but their marriage is a true and valid marriage nonethelss, in both the eyes of God and the Church.