[af_vet_1981]

Are you really claiming canonized Scripture as a Catholic exclusive? The process of canonization took place long before the Protestant Reformation. Back at a point of common heritage for both the Catholics and the Protestants. When a tree forks, neither fork has a superior claim to the trunk. Protestants can trace their lineage back to the apostolic church as well and prior to the 1500s, it would be a shared heritage. What you just presented is a false dilemma.

The problem with your scenario is that those who conjecture that Mary had other children reject the testimonies of the Reformers themselves, who, as others have already demonstrated, defended the teaching of the holy catholic apostolic church that Mary had no other physical children save Jesus. Thus the burden of proof is on the modernists who originated the supposition that Jesus had other siblings through Mary.

[CommerceComet]

The problem with your scenario is that those who conjecture that Mary had other children reject the testimonies of the Reformers themselves, who, as others have already demonstrated, defended the teaching of the holy catholic apostolic church that Mary had no other physical children save Jesus. Thus the burden of proof is on the modernists who originated the supposition that Jesus had other siblings through Mary.

I don't feel any obligation to believe something just because a Reformer believed it. Even if you're correct and most or all reformers believed that Mary had no other children, I doubt any held this belief is essential to salvation.

Having the burden of proof isn't too big a problem. With numerous references to Jesus' siblings, any natural reading of Scripture without preconceived notions would cause the reader to believe that Jesus had siblings. It seems that the Catholic position is the one that has to keep explaining away Biblical passages.