Ah, marriage...
For context...
Even in classical antiquity, Roman lawyers had discussed whether consent or sexual intercourse, or both, were necessary for a valid marriage. The most common opinion was that consent alone was sufficient, but some experts continued to affirm that physical union perfected the marriage and rendered it binding. Christian writers found the issue especially delicate, as they were loath to affirm that the marriage of Jesus' parents, Joseph and Mary, which was never sexually consummated, was in any respect imperfect.
(Medieval Households, David Herlihy, Harvard University Press, 1985, p. 80)
He's discussing how the medieval family came to be, and at that point, how the definitions for a binding marriage came about. Anyways, it's not that I'm particularly interested in whether or not Mary and Joseph ever actually consummated their marriage, it just sounds odd. I always thought James was Joseph's son. Which would indicate that the marriage was, indeed, consummated, no? Does he mean up to the point of Jesus' birth? Clearly, it was important, and so it just strikes me as an odd statement.
(ETA: I'm sure they know I'm agonizing over the release of the Winter quarter Dean's list, and that's why they haven't released it yet...)
Even in classical antiquity, Roman lawyers had discussed whether consent or sexual intercourse, or both, were necessary for a valid marriage. The most common opinion was that consent alone was sufficient, but some experts continued to affirm that physical union perfected the marriage and rendered it binding. Christian writers found the issue especially delicate, as they were loath to affirm that the marriage of Jesus' parents, Joseph and Mary, which was never sexually consummated, was in any respect imperfect.
(Medieval Households, David Herlihy, Harvard University Press, 1985, p. 80)
He's discussing how the medieval family came to be, and at that point, how the definitions for a binding marriage came about. Anyways, it's not that I'm particularly interested in whether or not Mary and Joseph ever actually consummated their marriage, it just sounds odd. I always thought James was Joseph's son. Which would indicate that the marriage was, indeed, consummated, no? Does he mean up to the point of Jesus' birth? Clearly, it was important, and so it just strikes me as an odd statement.
(ETA: I'm sure they know I'm agonizing over the release of the Winter quarter Dean's list, and that's why they haven't released it yet...)