(June 22, 2015 at 4:29 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(June 22, 2015 at 3:58 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: I'm thinking CL's opinion would be different if the 30-year-old fucking a 12-year-old was not in the Holy Family.

The belief is that they never actually had sex.

That much is true, but mary is believed to have been what we consider a minor today right? And she was thought to be married and what all that entailed to a far older man. Joseph is believed in the Catholic/Orthodox traditions to have been a much older man.

If she wasn't having sex with Joseph, she was comitting scandal surely? Making people think she was his wife when she wasn't.

After all, according to Catholic teaching if you can't have sex....You can't get married! I'm serious, that's why guys who lose the ability to get a stiffy are barred from marriage since they can't "consummate" it.

So, bearing in mind the dogmas of immaculate conception (being free from all sin) and eternal virginity.... Co-habitation at the very least if not scandal right? Cohabitation for all the non Catholics here is the Catholic social teaching that it is a sin for a male and a female to live together if they have no direct relationship to one another by blood or marriage. Previously this included simply being in a room alone with no others present to "chaperone".

(June 22, 2015 at 4:24 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I don't think this was the case with Mary and Joseph.

Based on what? Going by history, real history, and the law of the land in question there wasn't a single marriage that wasn't arranged.

And you are aware that the immaculate conception only became dogma with Pius IX? Because of your assumption of them not having sex.

(June 22, 2015 at 4:39 pm)abaris Wrote:

(June 22, 2015 at 4:24 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I don't think this was the case with Mary and Joseph.

Based on what? Going by history, real history, and the law of the land in question there wasn't a single marriage that wasn't arranged.

Catholic/Orthodox tradition in this case, both claim the marriage was essentially orchestrated by God as a cover so Mary had someone to look after her and to give the impression Jesus was Josephs child. So she wouldn't suffer stigma for being a single mother.

(June 22, 2015 at 4:29 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(June 22, 2015 at 3:58 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: I'm thinking CL's opinion would be different if the 30-year-old fucking a 12-year-old was not in the Holy Family.

The belief is that they never actually had sex.

So James also was conceived without coitus?

eta: Just read where Jerome said that James couldn't have been Jesus's brother, because Mary was supposedly a lifelong virgin.

How did he determine that?

(June 22, 2015 at 4:42 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote:

(June 22, 2015 at 4:29 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: The belief is that they never actually had sex.

So James also was conceived immaculately?

Catholics don't believe James was Jesus's brother. They don't claim to know what he was but most say cousin.

It's got a fair bit of a case behind it, the word used for "brother" in the original language and context could just quite as easily mean any male relative. It's only really the Protestants who ignore the original context who say James was Jesus' brother, and even then many don't.

(June 22, 2015 at 4:41 pm)Metis Wrote: Catholic/Orthodox tradition in this case, both claim the marriage was essentially orchestrated by God as a cover so Mary had someone to look after her and to give the impression Jesus was Josephs child. So she wouldn't suffer stigma for being a single mother.

Yeah, nutritor domini and yada, yada, yada. I was talking about the real lay of the land back at that time.

(June 22, 2015 at 4:46 pm)abaris Wrote:

(June 22, 2015 at 4:41 pm)Metis Wrote: Catholic/Orthodox tradition in this case, both claim the marriage was essentially orchestrated by God as a cover so Mary had someone to look after her and to give the impression Jesus was Josephs child. So she wouldn't suffer stigma for being a single mother.

Yeah, nutritor domini and yada, yada, yada. I was talking about the real lay of the land back at that time.

Rather optimistic an expectation for a believer don't you think?

(June 22, 2015 at 4:31 pm)Neimenovic Wrote:

(June 22, 2015 at 4:29 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: The belief is that they never actually had sex.

and that somehow makes a 30yo man marrying a 12yo ok?

I do not think there is a particular line drawn in stone on what kind of age differences a married couple can morally have. It is not always-and-everywhere-no-matter-what, ok. It can depend on culture, emotional/physical maturity of the girl, how respectfully the man handles it, etc.

Obviously in 21st century America this would be immoral, both because of the culture and because it is against the law. But I can see how in a totally different culture it can be different.

I do agree with all of you that this in particular is subjective.

Another thing I think is subjective is the standards of modesty. I think it'd be immoral if I walked around my neighborhood block topless wearing fig leaves over the bottom, but I do not think it is moral that the indigenous people do this in their "neighborhoods".

---

(June 22, 2015 at 4:34 pm)Metis Wrote:

(June 22, 2015 at 4:29 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: The belief is that they never actually had sex.

That much is true, but mary is believed to have been what we consider a minor today right? And she was thought to be married and what all that entailed to a far older man. Joseph is believed in the Catholic/Orthodox traditions to have been a much older man.

If she wasn't having sex with Joseph, she was comitting scandal surely? Making people think she was his wife when she wasn't.

After all, according to Catholic teaching if you can't have sex....You can't get married! I'm serious, that's why guys who lose the ability to get a stiffy are barred from marriage since they can't "consummate" it.

So, bearing in mind the dogmas of immaculate conception (being free from all sin) and eternal virginity.... Co-habitation at the very least if not scandal right? Cohabitation for all the non Catholics here is the Catholic social teaching that it is a sin for a male and a female to live together if they have no direct relationship to one another by blood or marriage. Previously this included simply being in a room alone with no others present to "chaperone".

See post 1588

---

(June 22, 2015 at 4:41 pm)Metis Wrote:

(June 22, 2015 at 4:39 pm)abaris Wrote: Based on what? Going by history, real history, and the law of the land in question there wasn't a single marriage that wasn't arranged.

Catholic/Orthodox tradition in this case, both claim the marriage was essentially orchestrated by God as a cover so Mary had someone to look after her and to give the impression Jesus was Josephs child. So she wouldn't suffer stigma for being a single mother.

This is correct, thank you.

---

(June 22, 2015 at 4:44 pm)Metis Wrote:

(June 22, 2015 at 4:42 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: So James also was conceived immaculately?

Catholics don't believe James was Jesus's brother. They don't claim to know what he was but most say cousin.

It's got a fair bit of a case behind it, the word used for "brother" in the original language and context could just quite as easily mean any male relative. It's only really the Protestants who ignore the original context who say James was Jesus' brother, and even then many don't.

^Yes.

Catholic/Orthodox tradition in this case, both claim the marriage was essentially orchestrated by God as a cover so Mary had someone to look after her and to give the impression Jesus was Josephs child. So she wouldn't suffer stigma for being a single mother.
[/quote]

This is correct, thank you.

[/quote]

Which, again, only became dogma with Pius IX.

(June 22, 2015 at 4:59 pm)abaris Wrote: Catholic/Orthodox tradition in this case, both claim the marriage was essentially orchestrated by God as a cover so Mary had someone to look after her and to give the impression Jesus was Josephs child. So she wouldn't suffer stigma for being a single mother.

This is correct, thank you.

[/quote]

Which, again, only became dogma with Pius IX.
[/quote]

This is true. Before that, it was not official Church teaching.