Change?

One of those light bulb jokes going the rounds a few years ago:
"How many Oratorians does it take to change a light bulb?" Had several answers, one was a very extensive list of cantors, step-ladder bearers and steadiers, bugia holders, assistant of the first and second step etc. various ministers of the switch and of the mains, etc., etc., etc. Another answer was, "And what precisely does the Sacred Congregation for the Sacred Liturgy say about the "lux bulbus"? The one I liked was, ""How many Oratorians does it take to change a light bulb?" The response was  an incredulously voiced, "Change?"
(Sorry Fathers, no offence intended.)

The introduction of St Joseph into the Eucharist Prayers to bring them in line with the 1962 revision of the ancient Roman Canon was an idea introduced by Pope Benedict, and has now been promulgated by Pope Francis.

There are lots of good reasons for the introduction of the name of the "spouse" of the Blessed Virgin, for me, first and foremost, is that in a time when fatherhood and espousal or marriage is going out of fashion, we need as much devotion to St Joseph as we can scrape up. The other reason is that devotion to the Saints and the inclusion of their names in the Canon of the Mass, the Confiteor, the Offertory Prayers, the Libera Nos is ancient and very much a part of Roman Catholicism, so this is a tiny bit of restoration.

Although there are lots of very good reasons for the inclusion of St Joseph, there are also some good reasons not to have done this, this is where the  incredulously voiced, "Change?" comes in.

One reason is that St Joseph was never a name that was used in the Roman list of Saints, devotion to him is a somewhat recent development. In the Middle Ages devotion to St Joseph in England was more likely to have been to St Joseph of Arimathea rather than the foster-father of Jesus.

The major problem which I see is one that was feared before the Reformation and in Orthodoxy, that  Josephine devotion took away from devotion to the Mother of God, the Blessed Mary Ever-Virgin. In my diocese there is modern church, where statues from its predecessor have been placed. On one wall in the "devotional area" the statues of Mary and Joseph are placed together, the impression is that they are equal. The seems to be a denial that Mary is "the highest honour of our race", she alone is Immaculately Conceived, she alone is Assumed into Heaven because she shared parenthood of the Saviour with God the Father, not St Joseph.

In ancient iconography the Blessed Virgin was always paired with John the Baptist, not St Joseph, therefore my partially incredulously voiced "Change?" is based on a slight concern that the change marks a lessening of devotion to the Mother of God and therefore of a weakening of the doctrine of the Incarnation and God's saving intervention in human history through Jesus.

This image sums up some of my concerns. Apart from its ugliness and poor execution, this mosaic from Westminster Cathedral seems theologically highly problematic to me, I think it is heretical! 

Is St Joseph really "larger" than Mary, does he really have a greater hand on Jesus than His Mother, was he even her equal? Isn't his re;lationship to Jesus, like our mediated through her, the Mother given to us at the Cross? Does he really share the same gaze as Jesus in looking out to the world? Did Jesus in any way resemble him rather than his Mother?