>> Wait,,,,,,what??? So now Joseph was married to two Mary’s at the same time? Or did he divorce the “other Mary”? Or was this “other Mary” of Matthew ......wait, are you sensing what I’m sensing here? Oh what a tangled web they weave. <<
You throw in that bit about divorce or bigamy and purposely mix the Greek and Roman views to make it seem like I’m holding an absurd position, but I already explained that the Greek notion is that he was a widower, not a divorcee, not a bigamist.
However, what you point out is one reason why Catholics tend to reject the notion that James was Jesus’ half-brother: the bible clearly lays out that the James, Jude, Joses and a fourth (I forget right now what his name was) were, in fact, sons of a different woman named Mary, who in fact, seems to have been married to (or possibly from) Alphaeus. The fact that four of Jesus’ followers (and, in fact, two of his closest) were brothers and would have the same names as his four brothers and their mother would have the same name as his mother seems a little far-fetched. (Although, because a non-bibilical prophesy that the Messiah would be born of a woman named “Mary,” a crazy proportion of Jesus’ mother’s contemporaries are named, “Mary,” so that part isn’t as unlikely as it may seem.)
Moreover, this other Mary seems to be Joseph’s sister-in-law, which would entirely validate the notion that they were cousins of Jesus.
Only if you purport that the Holy Spirit didn't know what He was talking about when He called them Jesus brothers rather than cousins.