Markup /brabant/22348

Comment
1) We don't know her age 
2) She was asked whether or not she wishes to bear Christ or not
3) She was, of course, mature enough, in spirit and in body in being able to bear Him in the first place.
These are not "questionable morals" unless you have, unfortunately, had your mind warped by a presentist view of history that neglects that for thousands of years, there was no such thing as an "age of maturity" indicated by an actual amount of years, but mental and physical fortitude. For instance, many men would, almost immediately upon reaching puberty, become workers, get married, etc. because they were already seen as men.
Also, Mary was married, but her relationship with St. Joseph was not sexual. St. Joseph was more like a caretaker to her.
>
Also, "what most people consider" is not relevant here. The majority of people 100 years ago used to have views that diverge from modern ones in nearly every single possible way. That does not change objective truth. Christian morals do not and cannot be bent or shaped by the current mentality of the societies of the world, not to mention that one has no justification in believing in any particular societal standard for morality, as they diverge and contradict, but ultimately must cling to the objective, universal and unchanging Christian ethic in order to have a justification in one's morality in the first place.
>
The vast majority of people considered 15 to be an age of maturity for men in the middle ages, viewing them as physically and mentally capable enough of hard work. Nowadays, we do not have 15 year olds working on the fields. Why would this be wrong and our modern standard be right? You cannot just say "we are better just because", you need an objective criterion to determine why what was in the past was bad, and in order to do so, you must have the Christian ethic. 
The Christian ethic cannot be refuted simply because societal standards, which have always contradicted those of other societies, have changed.