Admitting to having OTHER children would lessen her special place that's been created for her.
The following passage has always been interpreted as evidence of Mary's vow of perpetual virginity and is impossible to explain otherwise:
But the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary; you have found favor with God. You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to call him Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over Jacob’s descendants forever; his kingdom will never end."Mary was engaged and understood the birds and the bees."How will this be," Mary [who was engaged] asked the angel, "since I am a virgin?"
Her response only makes sense if she had taken a vow of perpetual virginity, which was not unknown at the time.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
The Essenes and Mary's Vow of Perpetual Virginity
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Luther, Calvin and Zwingli believed in Mary's perpetual virginity.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
REPLIES TO COMMON OBJECTIONS:Q: But Jesus had "brothers and sisters".
A: This objection is very easy to answer, since it was common to call cousins "brothers and sisters." Indeed, there was no word specific to "cousin" in ancient Aramaic, hence the New Testament writers felt no need to differentiate between cousins and closer relatives.
This same use of the term "brothers and sisters" referring rather to "cousins" is found in Genesis 13:8, 14:14-16; Leviticus 10:4; 1 Chronicles 15:5-10, 23:21-22.
If Jesus really had brothers and sisters who were sons and daughters of Mary, why did he entrust his Mother to John the Beloved at his death? Would she not have been cared for by the other children? [further, it is possible that these "brothers and sisters" where children of Joseph by a previous marriage of which he was widowed]
Q: But Matthew 1:18 says, "BEFORE Joseph and Mary came together, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit." And it would not say BEFORE, if they did not have relations after.
A: The response is simple: We often say things like, "I left the city BEFORE I was able to visit my friend" and we by no means imply that we visited our friend AFTER we left.
Q: But Jesus is called the "first-born son", which implies that there were others.
A: Rather, the words "first-born" are a title which is applied even if there are no other children. It was of great significance in Jewish culture to be the first-born son, and this title was given even before any other children were born and was retained even if no other children were born.
Q: But Matthew 1:24-25 says, "And [Joseph] took unto him his wife [Mary]; and he knew her not TILL she brought forth her first-born Son." And Matthew would not have said TILL or UNTIL, if Joseph had not had relations with Mary after the birth of the Christ.
A: This is certainly the most complicated objection and it requires wisdom to see the truth. St. Jerome explains that, in the Scriptures, the word "until" is sometimes used to designate a fixed time, but also can designate and indefinite time. Hence, Psalm 122:2 states, "Our eyes are unto the Lord our God, UNTIL he have mercy on us" ; but from this we are not to suppose that we turn our eyes away from the Lord after he is merciful! Rather, our eyes are fixed on the Lord until he shows us his mercy and, after he is merciful to us, our eyes remain fixed upon him all the more!
And St. Jerome concluded, "Thus the evangelist says that the Mother of God was not known by her husband until she gave birth, that we may be given to understand that still less did he know her afterwards." (Adversus Helvid. v)
And this interpretation is required by the other texts of Scripture (namely, her reply at the Annunciation) which indicate that Mary was indeed always a virgin.