"ALL married couples are commanded to have sex, except for short periods of time devoted to prayer."
This is true in general (this also entails an openness to bear children, i.e. we're talking about honest natural sexual relations, not perverse or contracepted acts) but it does no t require intercourse under any and all circumstances. For instance, if one of the spouses is actively HIV-positive, that would be a just reason to abstain from intercourse; or if the couple had a serious reason to avoid pregnancy (e.g. wife has cancer of the cervix or uterus or some other serious condition.)
Or do you think they are obliged to have intercourse regardless of their particular situation?
Remember that woman in Texas, Andrea Yates, who drowned her 5 children? This was about 10 -15 years ago. She had suffered from psychosis after her 2nd, 3rd, and 4th pregnancies, including hallucinations (both visual and auditory), multiple suicidal attempts and homicidal ideation, and yet her husband thought it was his duty to keep on impregnating er, and her duty to keep on having babies.
I always thought that was wrong, even moreso on her husband's part than on her's, because she was diagnosed psychotic but he was supposedly in his right mind. He knew she suffered by pregnancy-triggered psychosis but kept on having intercourse with her regardless.
So although there is in marriage an exclusive exchange of conjugal rights (the wife's conjugal right to her husband, the husband's conjugal right to his wife) there is not a limitless obligation to have intercourse in marriage.
As for Mary, she had a serious reason to abstain with Joseph, because it was God who had a conjugal right to her.
Just ask, “Who is Jesus’ father?” In terms of the origin of His conception, it’s not Joseph, but the Holy Spirit in one sense, and God the Father in another. (Multiple senses and meanings and applications are common in Holy Scripture.)
If Jesus’ parents were Mary and the Holy Spirit, then by simple analogy it follows that Mary (in this particular sense, and this alone) is the “spouse of the Holy Spirit”.
Don't think that implies that Mary had equality with God, when in fact it’s only a limited analogical description based on Mary’s relation to the Holy Spirit in the matter of the conception of Jesus.
In any case, in no place does the Scripture authorize bigamy, i.e. according conjugal rights to more than one person.
The Mormons teach that Jesus was the product of sexual reproduction. Catholicism is in company of like minds, apparently.
An angel told Joseph in a dream to not fear to take Mary AS HIS WIFE.
That comes with understood repsonsibilities and privileges, one of which is sex. I have no doubt that when God had the angel give Joseph that message, that HE knew how Joseph would interpret it.
And Scripture tells us that Joseph did not know her (aka have sex) until AFTER she gave birth.
Since Mary did not have physical union with the Holy Spirit, there was no one flesh union that happened therefore the charge that a conjugal union happened is not valid.
If the charge is to be made that she is the spouse of the Holy Spirit and that a conjugal relationship was established, you’re forced into the position of claiming that physical sex was involved.
As always I enjoy our conversations and I wish you the best.
“But she could not be conjugally given to Joseph -— in the full, one-flesh sense -— because she had already been given to God for the exercise of her sexual reproductive capacity.”
She had not been given maritally to God. She never had sex with God. She did reproduce. She was miraculously impregnated. She was married to Joseph and we can assume they had normal sex at some point after her normal pregnancy and normal delivery.
“This is true in general (this also entails an openness to bear children, i.e. we’re talking about honest natural sexual relations, not perverse or contracepted acts) but it does no t require intercourse under any and all circumstances. For instance, if one of the spouses is actively HIV-positive, that would be a just reason to abstain from intercourse; or if the couple had a serious reason to avoid pregnancy (e.g. wife has cancer of the cervix or uterus or some other serious condition.)”
We agree, but we are not aware that Mary had any disease or other serious reason to avoid marital intimacy. We must assume as an obedient believer she obeyed God’s commands.
“I always thought that was wrong, even moreso on her husband’s part than on her’s, because she was diagnosed psychotic but he was supposedly in his right mind. He knew she suffered by pregnancy-triggered psychosis but kept on having intercourse with her regardless.”
I think we agree here. Some people should not have kids and if so, should take steps to not have kids.
“So although there is in marriage an exclusive exchange of conjugal rights (the wife’s conjugal right to her husband, the husband’s conjugal right to his wife) there is not a limitless obligation to have intercourse in marriage.”
Unless there is a reason to prohibit it, obedience requires it.
“As for Mary, she had a serious reason to abstain with Joseph, because it was God who had a conjugal right to her.”
The Scriptures do not say this. It is conjecture. There is no idea in Scripture that Mary had a sexual relationship with God or that God ever had “conjugal rights” to Mary. Not once. Not repeatedly. Not a marriage. She was selected to bear Messiah. She did. She went on with her normal life. Scripture is silent on anything else.
“If Jesus’ parents were Mary and the Holy Spirit, then by simple analogy it follows that Mary (in this particular sense, and this alone) is the “spouse of the Holy Spirit”.”
MDO, this is not only a false analogy, it is more than Scripture ever claims. God simply performed a miracle. He didn’t marry her.
“In any case, in no place does the Scripture authorize bigamy, i.e. according conjugal rights to more than one person. “
In this context, it isn’t bigamy to be married to one human man and have sex and reproduce.
To assume otherwise is to make up things and pretend they are true... for what purpose?
Finally, I guess I will await the presentation of all the evidence you found from before 100 ad to demonstrate that anyone ever believed Mary remained a virgin or had no other kids during the time of the Apostles. I don’t know everything, so if you have it, I’d like to see it. If it doesn’t exist, it makes it very difficult to claim it was “always believed” before 1500 ad.
Best to you.
The one big flaw with MDO's argument about Mary is that Mary was already espoused to marry Joseph when the angel made the announcement.
That, in the Jewish custom of the day, WAS a legal marriage, which did entitle Joseph his conjugal rights.
He was considering DIVORCING her, not a term one uses if one is not in a legal marriage.
Therefore, if one is going to go by the conjugal rights angle, The Holy Spirit would have been impregnating a woman whose conjugal rights were already spoken for, thus making, (and I'm sure the RC's will jump all over this one) the Holy Spirit and Mary both adulterers in having some sort of conjugal relationship with an already legally. married woman.
As for Mary, she had a serious reason to abstain with Joseph, because it was God who had a conjugal right to her.
Wrong. since she was already married to Joseph, legally although not yet consumated, it was JOSEPH who had those conjugal rights. Mary was a MARRIED woman when God told her she would bear Jesus. Joseph had every right to take her as a normal wife after the birth of Jesus with normal expectation of a normal sexual relationship with HIS wife.
Calling Mary the spouse of the Holy Spirit when she was legally married to a man, would make both her and the Holy Spirit adulterers, if the conjugal angel were correct.
There could NOT have been a conjugal relationship between Mary, a human being, and the Holy Spirit, diety.
I wondered how Joseph felt about this ???
Catholics have a strange view of sex.. it is not considered a sacred type of of Gods relationship with the saved ... it is a function with which to have children.. One poster here told me that if a couple uses birth control the sex is nothing but "mutual masterbation" ...I always thought the reason for the "perpetual virginity" nonsense was the men that developed it did not like the thought of a man in the same vagina that had given birth to Christ.. never mind that it was he that created it ...