Previous • Contents • Next
I. 3 -- Joseph, Betrothed "Just Man," Husband
of Mary
Matthew does not hesitate to call Joseph and Mary "husband" (Mt 1:16,19)
and "wife" (Mt 1:20,24) without qualification, despite
the virginal conception of Jesus. In the only passage of the
entire Gospel which speaks of their marriage, Matthew 1:18-25,
the virginal conception is mentioned almost casually, as if the
readers were already aware of it, but unaware of how it could
be reconciled with Davidic messianism. If the word "origin" in
the introductory verse 18 is to be translated any more specifically,
it could read "Now the parentage of Jesus Christ was
like this," rather than "Now the birth of ...," since it explains
the situation of Jesus' human parents in relationship to the
divine mystery, and does not actually describe the birth itself.
This passage, which has been interpreted in a variety of ways,
describes Joseph's experience and may be correctly understood
only in light of this fact.
I. 3.1 Background of Betrothal and Divorce
There is no evidence whatsoever in the Gospel to support the
image of an old widowed Joseph as presented in the Apocrypha,
which merit no claim to historicity. The most likely presumption
on reading that Mary and Joseph were "betrothed" (Mt 1:18)
is that they were two youths of ordinary marriageable age. Common
practice was to celebrate marriage in two main stages, the first
being that of the contractual arrangements culminating in consent
or "betrothal." After a period of perhaps one year in which preparations
were made to enter together into a new home, the second stage
of actually "taking" one's wife into that home occurred, and
would be accompanied by a great feast such as that of the ten
maidens (Mt 25:1-13) or that at Cana (Jn 2:1-11).
The conception of Jesus occurred while Mary and Joseph were in
that period between betrothal and cohabitation, thus "before
they had come together" (Mt 1:18).
Betrothal was much more than modern day "engagement." Its juridical
consequences were similar to those of a Catholic marriage today
for which the union has not yet been consummated, although the
wedding was validly celebrated. The betrothed were already called "husband" and "wife," enjoying
the same legal rights as spouses who had already celebrated their
marriage feast (cf. Dt 20:7; 25:5-10; Mt 22:24).
Only cohabitation and conjugal relations were excluded during
the period of betrothal. Infidelity carried all the consequences
of adultery. Separation required a formal decree.
There were two manners of effecting a divorce during betrothal.
The first was by means of a defamatory trial for suspected adultery,
in which the husband publicly accused the woman, exposing her
to the punishment of death prescribed by the law (Dt 22:23-24).
A husband whose betrothed was certainly guilty of adultery could
not retain her, but he could proceed with the second, less public
manner of divorce. On his own initiative, in a domestic manner
without public trial, he could give her a declaration before
two witnesses and come to an agreement on financial matters.
In the case of rape (which was presumed when relations took place
outside the city), no public trial and condemnation was prescribed
(Dt 22:25-27), and therefore the first manner of divorce
would not apply, although the domestic type of divorce before
two witnesses might still be enacted. Mere suspicion of adultery
need not necessarily be resolved or acted upon. Lastly, it must
be noted that a domestic divorce during betrothal did not necessarily
imply any type of sexual infidelity or suspicion, but could proceed
even for unspecified reasons.
I. 3.2 Problems with the Common "Suspicion
Interpretation"
Since the time of the apocryphal Protoevangelium of James,
many have interpreted Matthew 1:18-21 to say that Joseph suspected
Mary of infidelity. Although Joseph is commonly the subject of
active verbs in Matthew, verse 1:18 does not say that he found
her with child. Instead we encounter the impersonal "she was
found," which can equally be translated "she found herself" or
simply "it happened that she was." The suspicion interpretation
mentally separates the phrase "of the Holy Spirit" from its verb,
as if those finding that she is pregnant do not know the origin
of the pregnancy. Grammatically there is no reason for such a
separation, since taken at face value the sentence seems to describe
a single discovery, that she was "with child of the Holy Spirit." This
single discovery is in fact the central point the passage is
explaining. We are not told how Joseph learned of the pregnancy.
It is often supposed that he simply observed the fact of the
pregnancy without being told of it first. Many have thought that
it would not be Mary's place to reveal this mystery to anyone,
but even so she might still be obliged in fairness to her betrothed
to state her innocence in advance, even though she might not
be free to explain it. One might also hypothesize that out of
trust, sensitivity, and fairness to her betrothed, Mary was obliged
to reveal the mystery to Joseph, if to no one else, although
she still was not able to reveal his vocation to him, since this
could come only from God.
Whatever the manner of Joseph's learning of Mary's pregnancy,
the Gospel says that, until the angel appeared to him, the reaction
of Joseph, the just man, was to consider quietly separating from
her. We are not told why he planned to divorce her, and it must
be noted that Matthew makes no mention of any suspicion on the
part of Joseph. Although the common suspicion hypothesis enjoys
wide popularity, it is not the only interpretation. Nor is it
without problems, for it depends on a number of assumptions that
cannot be proved. Its assumption that "of the Holy Spirit" is
added for the readers' knowledge, while unknown to Joseph, makes
the phrase an unusual, superfluous addition; whereas, taken at
face value, the sentence indicates that Mary and Joseph knew
of Mary's pregnancy and of its divine origin. Nor does the suspicion
interpretation lend itself to the best understanding of the phrases "just
man" and "do not fear," which occur in the passage and which
we must examine in depth.
I. 3.3 Joseph's Justice
Matthew 1:19 follows by stating that Joseph, "being a just
man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her
quietly." Adherence to the suspicion theory results in trying
to interpret Joseph's "justice" simply in terms of his reaction
to the law in the face of this suspicion. If Joseph knew of the
virginal conception from the start, however, then his justice
can be understood in the fuller sense of trusting, obedient faith
in the Lord. Matthew uses the Greek word meaning "just" more
than the other evangelists. From reading the translations, one
may not always realize that this same word is being used, since
in different places it is also rendered as "righteous," "upright," or "innocent." Matthew
applies the word to those people of faith of the Old Testament
who longed for the fulfillment of the promise (Mt 13:17;
23:29), and to those disciples who will see the fulfillment of
salvation (Mt 13:43,49; 25:37,46). New Testament letters
also refer to the just as those who live by faith (Rom 1:17; Gal 3:11; Heb 10:38).
Matthew, who is most familiar with the Old Testament Scriptures,
is certainly aware of the meaning of this same word used throughout
the Old Testament, wherein God who is preeminently "just" or "righteous" calls
his people to emulate his holiness. In the Psalms the righteous
shall possess the land (Ps 37:29), shall flourish like
the palm tree (Ps 92:12), shall have light rise for
them in darkness (Ps 112:4). Three specific people to
whom the word is applied are Noah, who is the instrument of a
purifying new creation (Gen 6:9; 7:1); Tamar, who is
one of the irregularities entering into Matthew's genealogy of
Christ (Gen 38:26; Mt 1:3); and king David,
to whom Matthew has given so much attention (1 Sam 24:17).
Without mentioning specific names, chapter 10 of the Wisdom of
Solomon gives a resume with unmistakable references to the just
men of salvation history: Noah (Wis 10:4), Abraham (Wis 10:5),
Lot (Wis 10:6; cf. 2 Pt 2:7), Jacob (Wis 10:10),
Joseph (Wis 10:13), and the people led out of Egypt
by Moses (Wis 10:15,20). The Wisdom reference to Cain
as unrighteous, is paralleled by Matthew's characterization of
Abel, his brother, as righteous (Wis 10:3; Mt 23:35;
cf. Heb 11:4; 1 Jn 3:12).
Those who hold that Joseph suspected Mary of infidelity then
interpret his justice as simple obedience to the law by not marrying
an adulteress, or as compassion by doing it quietly rather than
publicly, or as a combination of the two. Either of these explanations
is quite weak: Matthew is not emphasizing Joseph's obedience
to the law here, stating rather that Joseph was "unwilling" to
expose her to the punishment of the law; and compassion or leniency
are not normally signified by the word "just" in Scripture. A
variant interpretation is that Joseph suspected not that Mary
was unfaithful, but that she was the innocent victim of rape,
and that he decided to separate so as to allow her to marry the
father of her child. In this hypothesis, it is even more difficult
to explain what type of justice is involved in quietly leaving
a raped betrothed to marry her rapist. Furthermore, in the case
of a raped betrothed the law prescribes death for the rapist,
rather than divorce from the betrothed (Dt 22:25-27).
It seems, rather, that Joseph is a "just man" in the same sense
used for the examples cited throughout the rest of Scripture.
Joseph is preeminently a man of faith. Like the people listed
above, he awaits the fulfillment of the promise. Like them he
believes God and places himself at his disposition as one of
the final humble instruments for the promised fulfillment of
salvation. He believes that the pregnancy is by the Holy Spirit,
and his reaction before the mystery is one of reverent awe. His
response is like that of Moses removing his sandals before the
burning bush (Ex 3:5), of Isaiah terrified by the appearance
of the thrice holy God (Is 6:5), of Elizabeth before
the mother of the Lord (Lk 2:43), of the centurion whom
Jesus offers to visit (Mt 8:8), and of Peter who seeing
his nets filled exclaims: "Lord, depart from me, for I am a sinner" (Lk 5:8).
Joseph decides to divorce Mary in the private, domestic, "no
fault" manner before two witnesses (or perhaps with none at all)
not out of suspicion, but in order to cooperate with God's plan.
Given the Incarnation, he cannot presume to continue with this
marriage, to appropriate to himself and to act as father of the
divine child engendered by the Holy Spirit. His uprightness,
based on deep faith, thus carries throughout the whole passage
that follows, and is not limited to the one act of deciding to
divorce Mary.
I. 3.4 The Angel's Message
As Joseph "considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to
him in a dream," and indicated to him his vocation with respect
to this awesome mystery (Mt 1:20-23). This passage contains
many elements that are characteristic of annunciations of births
and of commissionings, as found in other parts of Scripture.
One of these elements is that the Lord's messenger addresses
him by name and by the title that indicates the role he is to
play in guaranteeing Davidic descent to the child, as already
indicated in the genealogy. The angel's first words of address
are, "Joseph, son of David" (Mt 1:20), in the same way
that Gideon was addressed as "you mighty man of valor" (Jgs 6:12)
to indicate the role he would be sent to play in God's plan.
The words that follow, "do not fear," are a common formula
uttered by angels in the New Testament, but only on momentous
occasions, such as the annunciations of the births of John the
Baptist and of Jesus (Lk 1:13,30), the declaration that
Peter "will be catching men" (Lk 5:10), the announcement
to the women that Jesus is risen and that they are sent to tell
the brethren (Mt 28:5,10), and the commission for Paul
to "speak up and not be silent" (Acts 18:9). The angel's
words are meant to directly dispel the overwhelming awe that
Joseph feels before the mystery of the Incarnation, now blended
with his awe at the appearance of the angel. The "do not fear" is
not spoken to simply relieve whatever feelings might accompany
suspicion. Such feelings would perhaps be more like hurt, sorrow,
anger, or jealousy, but not "fear" as understood in the other
situations addressed by the angel. Like Gideon (Jgs 6:22-23,
cf. Ex 33:20) Joseph must be reassured, and like Tobias
(Tob 6:15-17) he needs a communication from God to know
that he is divinely chosen for this marriage.
Current translations of Matthew 1:20 are based on the suspicion
hypothesis and therefore separate "do not fear to take Mary your
wife" from what follows by a comma and by a conjunction such
as "for," thus interpreting that the angel is telling Joseph
what he does not know: "that which is conceived in her is of
the Holy Spirit." To learn of the divine conception for the first
time, however, would seem reason to experience fear in the biblical
sense seen in the examples above, rather than reason to allay
fear. The Greek text uses no such punctuation, and grammatical
analysis of the conjunctions used shows that instead of being
translated as "for . and," they could also be rendered "indeed
. but." If Joseph already knows that Mary is pregnant by the
Holy Spirit, and if this very knowledge is the reason for his
planning to separate from her out of reverential fear, then the
angel's words are understood to respond directly to that reality,
by telling him not to hesitate about continuing with the marriage.
He is to have an important role in this work of God: to act as
Mary's husband and to name the child. The translation could thus
read: "Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary your wife
even though that which is conceived in her is indeed of the Spirit
that is Holy. She will bear a son, whom you will give the name
Jesus ." With these words Joseph is given his vocation and mission.
The angel is telling him to continue with his original plan to
take Mary his wife into his home, in accord with the normal final
stage of marriage for which they had been preparing. The importance
of giving the child a name in the line of David has already been
shown. The call to name the child "Jesus" is an invitation to
righteous Joseph to base his life on faith in the salvation promised.
As soon as the message is communicated to Joseph, he obeys in
the tradition of the patriarchs. He is the just man of faith
who "on rising from sleep" immediately does as the angel commands,
taking Mary as his wife and naming the child "Jesus" (Mt 1:24-25).
I. 3.5 Virginity
Although Joseph and Mary were truly married and formed a family
together, Joseph "knew her not until she had borne a son" (Mt 1:25).
This is the biblical way of saying that they refrained from normal
conjugal relations. Although we are not told why they did so,
we may presume that it was out of respect for this unique mystery
of virginal conception and divine Incarnation. In this they were
in fulfillment of the Greek version of the Old Testament prophecy
about a virgin bearing a son (Is 7:14), as cited in
Matthew 1:23. The biblical expression for "until" makes absolutely
no implication about sexual relations after the birth, as our
English word does. In Matthew 28:20, for example, Jesus' promise
to be with his disciples until the close of the age
does not imply that he will not be with them thereafter. In 2
Samuel 6:23 (2 Kgs 6:23 of the Greek Old Testament),
Michal's having no child until the day of her death
certainly does not mean that she has any afterwards. Both references
use the same conjunction for "until." The tradition of the Fathers
of the Church firmly rejected the interpretation that the "brothers
of the Lord" listed in Matthew 13:55 and elsewhere were children
of Mary, and largely disputed the Apocryphal version that they
could be children of Joseph by a former marriage. The Catholic
position has been and is that the unique marriage of Mary and
Joseph remained permanently virginal. Matthew does not pronounce
either in favor of this or against it. Neither does he see that
virginity in any way diminishes the marriage of Mary and Joseph,
which was willed by God and was necessary not only for Davidic
descent, as already shown, but also for the protection of Mary
and the rearing of the child in a loving home.
Mary and Joseph are truly "husband" and "wife" by divine decree.
In Matthew 2 it is Joseph whom the angel addresses to take Mary
and Jesus into Egypt, and then again to go to Nazareth and establish
a permanent home there. As husband and wife, Joseph and Mary
share in their respective manners the experiences of the virginal
conception, of the birth and naming of the child, of a home in
Bethlehem, of the journey into Egypt to escape from Herod, and
of domestic life at Nazareth. Most of all, they share a deep
faith in being able to participate so closely in the work of
salvation. It would be difficult to imagine that their virginal
love and affection could be second to that of any married couple,
considering the greatness of what they share. As husband and
wife, they serve as parents to the Son of God.
Previous • Contents • Next
