[Forest Keeper]

FK: "If she [Mary] never had any intention on having conjugal relations with a man, then she would be guilty of dishonoring her parents."

Unless, as was the case, her parents Joachim and Anna intended the marriage to be a custodial marriage.

Putting aside that your assertion is 100% extra-scriptural, what is a "custodial marriage"? After a search, New Advent did not recognize the term. What was the point in actually getting married since Joseph could have provided for her financially equally as well, if they were not married.

PLUS, the Protoevangelium says that she was from a wealthy family, but Joseph could not have been rich because they made a poor man's sacrifice after Jesus was born. This does not make sense. Given all this, if Joseph really was the old, old, uncle with one foot in the grave, as has been asserted by someone in this discussion, then it really would have been Mary taking care of him, if anything. But no one has argued that.

[annalex]

It is indeed extrascriptural, but the Protoevangelium is a historical document. It may have inaccuracies, as any historical document. It is still evidence available to us. I understand that theological arguments better have a scriptural basis, but we are making a historical argument here. The scruiptural point, of course, remains, that Mary was surprised to know that whe would conceive a child even though she was betrothed.

what is a "custodial marriage"?

I don't know if this is the correct term, but I meant by it a marriage contracted for purposes other than procreation, and for mutual convenience. For example, Joseph was to provide status, authority and wisdom, while Mary was to cook, clean and take care of him. Perhaps, as you point out, there was a dowry coming form her as well. Not an innatural arrangement considering the culture and the circumstances.