That would be St. Jerome, Doctor of the Church and translator of both Old and New Testaments. The treatise where he refutes the same views we see arising again more than 1,500 years later is Against Helvidius, c. 383. In it he covers the topics of this thread and notes the theory's novelty:
Pray tell me, who, before you appeared, was acquainted with this blasphemy? who thought the theory worth two-pence? You have gained your desire, and are become notorious by crime.
I'm afraid I miss your point. Do you take issue with my claim that Jerome thought of Joseph as a Perpetual Virgin?
Do you claim the following is not a direct quote of Jerome in the treatise "Against Helviduis"?
" You say that Mary did not continue a virgin: I claim still more, that Joseph himself on account of Mary was a virgin, so that from a virgin wedlock a virgin son was born. For if as a holy man he does not come under the imputation of fornication, and it is nowhere written that he had another wife, but was the guardian of Mary whom he was supposed to have to wife rather than her husband, the conclusion is that he who was thought worthy to be called father of the Lord, remained a virgin."