The context of the reference clearly indicates that the people were referring to Jesus, His parents, brothers and sisters. This is basic comprehension 101. The trouble is that the delusion caused by the Marian doctrine causes the Scripture to be twisted to fit that doctrine, rather than the doctrine be adapted to what the Scripture actually says.
It is stupidity to say that Joseph and Mary never consummated their marriage after Jesus was born. Are you saying that they had a sexless marriage? Come on....
Stupid on who's account? Isn’t there an adage among those who hold to the philosophies of Bible Alone that if it isn’t in the bible it isn’t so? Since there is no biblical evidence of anyone being called the son or daughter of Joseph or Mary then obviously there no “brothers” having a uterine relationship to Mary - that is according to the adage. But, let’s not end it there, it can be shown that it is likely Joseph and Mary took vows of chastity, they were both professed ascetics. Isn't it stupidity to go against non-biblical adages.
There is, however, compelling Sacred Scripture to show Mary took ascetic vows of chastity as did Joseph to lend his support in cooperating with Mary’s vows. More likely Joseph had made a vow of chastity himself. Furthermore, they were “married” in every sense of the word we give it today, except for the sharing of marriage bed. Such relationships exist to this very day. Before you go nuts with objections, let me remind you that marriage isn’t defined by going to bed, rather it is the will of two coming together in such a way as to be of one heart, one mind and one will, the union of two forming one. We hear the promise of such unions in the Eucharist, those who eat and drink the Real Presence abide in Christ as He abides in them [Cf. John 6:57]. Marriage is a multiplier where the math is the expression of 1x1 ≥ 1. We are multiplied by our spouse while there is gain there is no loss, yet the sum remains, one or greater.
Not all vows in antiquity were deep commitments; nevertheless, failure to succeed the commitment meant spiritual ruin. Asceticism was practiced hundreds of years before Christ and still practiced today, maybe not in the same austere way as ages ago.
The spouse of the Lord desires a union with God, as humble love for her groom:
Do not consider me that I am brown, because the sun hath altered my color: the sons of my mother have fought against me, they have made me the keeper in the vineyards: my vineyard I have not kept. shew me, O thou whom my soul loveth, where thou feedest, where thou liest in the midday, lest I begin to wander after the flocks of thy companions. If thou know not thyself, O fairest among women, go forth, and follow after the steps of the flocks, and feed thy kids beside the tents of the shepherds. To my company of horsemen, in Pharao's chariots, have I likened thee, O my love. Thy cheeks are beautiful as the turtledove's, thy neck as jewels. We will make thee chains of gold, inlaid with silver. [Canticles 1:5-10]
According to Susanna Elm, author of
Virgins of God: The Making of Asceticism in Late Antiquity, asceticism was common. Sometimes the ascetic made vows of their physical prowess, suffering training as an athlete suffers building strength. Others made vows of abstinence, perhaps limiting food or drink, not unlike fasting. One obvious biblical example is Christ's fasting for 40 days and 40 nights.
The virgin has illustrious models to follow: the five wise virgins of Gospel of Matthew, Mary, and the famous Thecla, heroine of the Apocryphal Acts of Paul. Moreover, her bridegroom is not swayed by superficialities: 'Are you bereft of parents? You are not bereft of God. . . . Have courage, because the bridegroom Christ does not regard fading beauty...whether you are short or tall' [c. Matthew 25:1-13; Apocryphal Acts of Paul 8.105- 09, Susanna Elm, `Virgins of God': The Making of Asceticism in Late Antiquity: The Making of Asceticism in Late Antiquity]
Mary and Joseph lived out her vows in the customs of Judaism dedicating their lives to God. Those who practiced a divinely inspired asceticism usually take a solemn vow in the Temple; "He who takes a solemn vow contracts a spiritual marriage with God, which is much more excellent than a material marriage" (St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa). Such a vow espouses Mary to God, a vow that not even the Sanhedrin can break; only Joseph can do that, but He didn’t, recall Joseph is said to be “ a just man”.
The husband of a young woman had a right to cause her to break the vow. There is a proviso in the Law of Moses; the husband must object on the spot of hearing of his bride’s solemn vow to God, I call it the “disallow provision”. [Cf. Numbers 30:11-17]. If the husband fails to speak out at the appropriate time his duty was to stand aside allowing the woman to fulfill her word. This would not be difficult for a “just” man and especially so for St. Joseph who supported Mary in every way possible. (Sorry ladies, women didn’t get the same right of refusal as men.) In our case Mary herself is the very essence of the vow becoming the spouse of God, and her earthly husband's role becomes the very essence of manhood to assist support and provide for the family. The Gospels of Luke and Matthew, as well as The Protoevangelium of James, indicate St. Joseph and the Blessed Virgin Mary had both made such vows. Joseph acted in support for his earthly wife "Now the generation of Christ was in this wise. . . Whereupon Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing publicly to expose her, was minded to put her away privately." [Matthew 1:18-19] The indication that Joseph was a "just man" had cultural meaning related to the vows ascetics in Judaism. Unlike some of us today who believe vows are meant to be broken, being a "
just man" implied that Joseph followed the Law of Moses impeccably and kept his word. [Cf. Matthew 1:19]
If we adopt possibility as the standard of judgment, we might maintain that Joseph had several wives because Abraham had, and so had Jacob, and that the Lord's brethren were the issue of those wives, an invention which some hold with a rashness which springs from audacity not from piety. You say that Mary did not continue a virgin: I claim still more, that Joseph himself on account of Mary was a virgin, so that from a virgin wedlock a virgin son was born. For if as a holy man he does not come under the imputation of fornication, and it is nowhere written that he had another wife, but was the guardian of Mary whom he was supposed to have to wife rather than her husband, the conclusion is that he who was thought worthy to be called father of the Lord, remained a virgin. [St. Jerome, Against Helvidius]
Mary's response to Gabriel's annunciation was a humble vow of fidelity, consistent with Temple rites of marriage. Thus, we hold the New Eve bore God's eternal new Adam in the form of a sacrificial lamb. She carried Him across the dark seas of sin and death to the shores of our redemption and life. The Ever-Virgin Mary then is the Ark of everlasting life, the mother of our Salvation, and the Queen of Heaven bringing Jesus to the shores of our salvation. Thus, St. Joseph is the oarsman who rows Him into our life. An unjust man might have taken another spouse, but not Joseph declared a just man. An unjust man might desecrate the Holy of Holies, but not Joseph a just man.
JoeT
