Every year on Christmas Eve one of the kids reads outloud the bible about the birth of Jesus. For years it has been the version of St. Matthew. However, this year someone got sidetracked to St. Luke and here's what happened. When my daughter got to the part about Joseph registering his family for the census it talked about Mary beingpregnant and promised to him in marriage--it didn't say his wife. You could have heard a pin drop the silence was so deafening. St Matthew says that after the angel appeared to Joseph, he married Mary. Sts. Mark and John say nothing. Anybody know which it is? I can make a beautiful lesson out of either answer but I wondered if there was a historical answer out there. Ellen

-- Ellen K. Hornby (dkh@canada.com), June 15, 2001

Answers

In those days, marriage had not been raised to the level of a sacrament. Under the old law, an "espoused" couple were as good as married, and were allowed to have sexual relations. Of course we know that Mary and Joseph never had marital relations, even after the birth of our Lord.

-- Christina (introibo2000@yahoo.com), June 15, 2001.

Ok, totally stupid question here. How do we know that Mary & Joseph had no marital relations after the birth of Jesus. Not that I don't belive it, but curious as to where we get that info. Thanks!

-- Wendy (weiskids@yahoo.com), June 15, 2001.

Maybe someone could give a better answer than this...tradition has it that Mary took a vow of virginity - for one thing, when the angel Gabriel appeared to her and told her she was to bear a son, she replied, "How can this be since I know not man?" But she was already espoused to Joseph...so why couldn't she just assume that she would have a child later? She knew she would never have relations with her husband. Also, at the time of the crucifixion, Jesus told St. John to take care of Mary. So there were no siblings to take care of her. Elsewhere in the Gospels, it speaks of "his sisters and brothers," which many Protestants use to question the perpetual virginity of Mary. But apparently there is no proper word in Aramaic for cousin, which these people were.

-- Christina (introibo2000@yahoo.com), June 16, 2001.

Christina,

It would of been against Jewish law for Mary not to had normal marital relations with Joseph. He was the husband and if their marriage had not be consumated then it would of been illegal, it would of been a sham. Mary did have other children. The word for cousin in the Bible is used as cousin not bretheren as when referring to Mary's cousin Elizabeth. The reason why Jesus asked the apostle John to look after Mary is no proof that she did not have other children. Jesus may of known that John would look after Mary in a better fashion than His own brothers. Presumably Joseph was still alive as well.

-- sam smith (ssmith@hotmail.com), June 16, 2001.

As usual, Sam-- Your opinion is slanted; not against the Virgin Mary, but against the Catholic Church, which has always held Mary was ever a Virgin. I for one would gladly thank you to keep your opinions to yourself. What in the world could you POSSIBLY know about Jewish law?

Mary the mother of Our Lord, by the grace of God is eternally a virgin. She had relations with NO man, her sainted husband Joseph was chaste and himself virginal, and he kept the law of Moses, just like any good Jew. His foster son Jesus Christ is also a virgin. Or would you presume to know otherwise?

I'll take the word of the Apostles, the Fathers of the Church, and the Catholic Church. They know what they were talking about. You don't.

God be with you and forgive your blindness; and by the holy intercession of the Mother of God, bring you to the True Faith and eternal salvation. Amen /

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), June 16, 2001.

Dear Sam, The spiritual union between the Holy Spirit and Mary was sacramental in my view in that it was the union that gave Life to the world. The Holy Spirit didn't need baptizing and Mary was without original sin and didn't need it either. In God's view Mary the spouse of the Holy Spirit as well as the daughter of the Father and Mother of the Son. He made her holy and full of grace. This is a mystery. Joseph however was to be a surrogate father here on earth for protection. In your words the marriage was a sham. It was certainly a cover and protection against the evil one that was seeking to destroy Him.

-- Pamela B (Rosylace@aol.com), June 16, 2001.

"I'll take the word of the Apostles, the Fathers of the Church, and the Catholic Church. They know what they were talking about. You don't."

Yes, you do that Eugene; I dare say that you aren't taking the words of the Apostles however. Certainly though you are following the Catholic doctrine.

I am apparently not allowed an opinion here that may differ from Eugene's slanted one, therefore there isn't much point in continuing this discussion.

-- sam smith (ssmith@hotmail.com), June 16, 2001.

+JMJ

Hello Sam,

I'm sure all of us here want to hear and discuss your opinions. Please explain why you believe Mary did not remain a virgin, contrary to 2,000 years of Christian discernment from the Holy Spirit's guidance. The apostles, Church Fathers and councils debated and condemned these same opinions you are making as being heretical. Even during the "Reformation" Martin Luther the key protestant reformer held orthodox views about Mary:

"It is an article of faith that Mary is Mother of our Lord and still a virgin."

Martin Luther, Martin Luther's Works, vol 11, pg 319

"......knew that she was to become the Mother of the Son of God, she did not wish to become the mother of the son of man, but remained in that gift."

Martin Luther, Martin Luther's Works, vol 11, pg 320

"Undoubtedly, there is no one so powerful that, depending on his own intelligence, without Scripture, he would maintain that she did not remain a virgin."

Martin Luther, Martin Luther's Works, vol 11, pg 320

-- Michael (Williams007@aol.com), June 17, 2001.

It would of been against Jewish law for Mary not to had normal marital relations with Joseph. He was the husband and if their marriage had not be consumated then it would of been illegal, it would of been a sham. Mary did have other children.--

The ''authority'' of Sam Smith-- Illegal!

Sam; once again I'll ask you to kindly save your opinions for somebody who asks you for one. Jewish ''law'' is a misnomer; it was the Mosaic Law, and you haven't a clue about its ''legal'' ramifications for St Joseph or Mary. You brazenly interfere with your hissy fits against the Mother of God, expecting those who love her to eat out of your hand. Sorry, Sam. Your credibility in this forum is totally shot.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), June 17, 2001.

who was the father of jesus?

-- jerome (jdc@nbc.com), July 03, 2001.

Dear Jerome:

Not was, IS the Father. The Father of Jesus Christ is Almighty God, the Eternal Father. Jesus is the only-begotten Son of the Father, and from the Father and Jesus proceeds the Third Person of the Holy Trinity, the Holy Spirit. This truth is revealed to us in the Holy Gospel.

Joseph was Jesus' foster father on earth; but not His actual father.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), July 03, 2001.

********************************************************************** well in the name of chirst our saviour...my dear protestant brothers and sisters,there are word of god told us " joseph did not have sexual contacts with mary,until jesus is born" well is true...but it also does'nt said they had after jesus is born.. this verse are to prove that mary is virgin.Because, we knew that mary is pregenant from spirit of god and both of us (catholic and protestant)belive in it..but god know this kind of question will rise and he (holy spirit) guide the appostals, to write this verse just to prove us that mary and joseph does'nt had sexual contact..well i would like to ask dear brothers and sisters a question......there is female who is chosen by god and she is consider holy among the women..and so giving birth to son of god,jesus chirts...will u think it is posible to his husband also a person belive in god to have sexual contact with her?...well i dont think so....may they good lord bless u and forgive ur blindness .. Amen...

-- vincent (highwaystar_06@yahoo.com), April 20, 2003.