THE HOLY BIBLE

 “Merciful Father, as you have sent the Holy Spirit on Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, to write all that You wished and wanted, we pray You, send the same Holy Spirit on us, so that we may understand, appreciate Your Word, and make it our plan of life. This we ask for the merits of Your Son, Jesus Christ. Amen.”

46 …  Concluding yesterday’s cathechesis, S.John gives us the identity of the women who were under the Cross on Calvary:
“Therefore the soldiers did these things. But standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene.”

It follows that during Christ’s  Agony on the Cross, there were; His Mother, Mary, the ‘other Mary’, sister of Jesus’ Mother, also called Mary, and so we might conclude that THIS Mary was the mother of James and Joses, so called the ‘brothers of Jesus. But in fact these must have been His cousins. We must not forget that there was the other Mary … Mary Magdalen.

Yes, one might argue, ‘but how is it possible to have two Marys in one family?     Even Biblical Scholars agree that it was rather difficult to have such a case, it was not probable. So they rightly concluded that this other Mary, must have been a cousin of Christ’s Mother, Mary.  Again, those famous ‘brothers of Jesus’ must have been, then, first or second cousins, or better still, relatives.

I took quite a long explanation on this point, but, it was necessary as this is one of the favourite points, which is so often quoted by those who want to attack the Catholic Church and her Teachings, wherever they might be, including FB. I did answer same to certain individuals on the FB, Catholic Party, which I do not form part anymore.

Now, another hot point is the quotation:
“He had no relations with her until she bore a son, 12 and he named him Jesus.” Matthew, 1,25
Truly, this verse seems to give the impression that Joseph did not have any relations with Mary until the birth of Jesus, so, he might have had relations after Jesus Birth.                                                                                          

But if we study more closely this verse, we find that our conclusion does not follow, as the Latins say: ‘non sequitur’.
Then, why on earth has Matthew written that statement?                                                                                  

 Let’s keep in mind the fact, that, the Angel of the Lord was sent to Joseph (Mt.1,20), troubled as he was, mentally tormented because of the pregnancy signs he had noticed on his beloved spouse. Now, the Angel wanted to assure Joseph that He who was to be born of Mary was the fruit, was conceived of the Holy Spirit (Mt.1, 22-27).

It follows, that Matthew’s aim in giving us, in writing down, in recording that ‘verse’ was one, and only one: the Virginal Conception of the Lord, Jesus Christ … and nothing else. It was never the intention of telling us, or informing us, about the private lives of Mary and Joseph, after Jesus’ Birth.                                          

Matthew’s aim , was, therefore to show us that in Jesus’ Conception, Joseph had absolutely no part. Yes, Jesus was conceived of the Holy Spirit (Mt.1, 20)

St.Jerome, great scholar of the Holy Book, one of the wisest scholars and commentators, an expert in languages and style of the literature of that period says: “The statement by Matthew, that Joseph had no relations with Mary before the Birth of Jesus, does not necessarily mean, does not follow or indicate that he DID have, after Christ’s Birth.”

The Holy Scripture tells us only that which did not happen.        /47


Certain Information taken, with kind permission, from the book “Who is Mary” by H.G.Mons. Sylvester Magro ofm, Bishop of Benghazi. A very dear friend.