Matthew 1:19–24

¹⁸  Now the birth of Jesus Christ to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit.¹⁹  And her husband Joseph, being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her quietly. ²⁰  But as he considered these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary as your wife, for that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. ²¹  She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.” ²²  All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet:

²³  “Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son,
    and they shall call his name Immanuel”

(which means, God with us). ²⁴  When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him: he took his wife,

Matthew 119–24 ESV – Bible Gateway

---

St. Augustine. Furthermore, this manner in which Christ was born of the Holy Spirit suggests to us the grace of God, by which man without any previous merits, in the very beginning of his nature, was united with the Word of God into so great unity of person, that he was also made son of God. (c. 38.). But inasmuch as the whole Trinity wrought to make this creature which was conceived of the Virgin, though pertaining only to the person of the Son, (for the works of the Trinity are indivisible,) why is the Holy Spirit only named in this work? Must we always, when one of the Three is named in any work, understand that the whole Trinity worked in that? [1]

St. Thomas Aquinas, in his commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, reflects on what St. Augustine wrote:

Although, however, according to Augustine, the works of the Trinity are indivisible, and therefore, that conception was worked not only by the Holy Ghost but also by the Father and Son; nevertheless, by a certain appropriation, it is attributed to the Holy Ghost; and this is for three reasons. The first reason is, because the Holy Ghost is love. And this was the sign of the greatest love, that God willed His Son to be incarnated; “God so loved the world, as to give His only begotten Son” (Jn. 3, 16). The second reason is that to the Holy Ghost is attributed grace; “There are diversities of graces, but the same Spirit” (I Cor. 12, 4); and this was the greatest grace. The third reason is assigned in the acts of the Council of Nicea, which is; that in us there is a twofold word: the word of the heart and the word of the voice. The word of the heart is that conception of the intellect, which is hidden from men, except inasmuch as it is expressed by the voice or the word of the voice. To the word of the heart is compared the eternal Word before the Incarnation, when He was with the Father, and hidden from us; but to the word of the voice is compared the Incarnate Word which now has appeared to us and is manifest. But the word of the heart is not joined to the voice except by means of the breath; and thus, rightly, the Incarnation of the Word, through which He visibly appeared to us, was made by means of the Holy Ghost.[2]

There have been many commentaries and books regarding the question of St. Joseph being declared a just man in scripture, along with the reason he wanted to send her away quietly.

The Ignatius Catholic Study Bible provides a summation of the traditional interpretations:

Catholic tradition proposes three main interpretations to explain why Joseph resolved to end his betrothal with Mary.
– (1) The Suspicion Theory. Some hold that Joseph suspected Mary of adultery when he discovered her pregnancy. Joseph thus intended to pursue a divorce in accord with Deut 24:1–4 until the angel revealed to him the miraculous cause of the conception (1:20). Joseph is said to be righteous because he shuns immorality and directs his life by the Law of God. Proponents of this view include St. Justin Martyr, St. John Chrysostom, and St. Augustine.
– (2) The Perplexity Theory. Others hold that Joseph found the situation of Mary’s pregnancy inexplicable. Divorce seemed to be his only option, and yet he wished to do this quietly, for he could not bring himself to believe that Mary had been unfaithful. Joseph is said to be righteous because he lives by the Law of God and judges Mary’s situation with the utmost charity. The main proponent of this view is St. Jerome, whose exegesis was adopted into the notes of the medieval Bible.
– (3) The Reverence Theory. Still others hold that Joseph knew the miraculous cause of Mary’s pregnancy from the beginning, i.e., he was made aware that the child was conceived “of the Holy Spirit” (1:18). Faced with this, Joseph considered himself unworthy to be involved in the Lord’s work, and his decision to separate quietly from Mary was a discretionary measure to keep secret the mystery within her. On this reading, the angel confirms what Joseph had already known and urges him to set aside pious fears that would lead him away from his vocation to be the legal father of the Messiah (1:20). Joseph is said to be righteous because of his deep humility and reverence for the miraculous works of God. Proponents of this view include St. Bernard of Clairvaux and St. Thomas Aquinas. [3]

St. Thomas Aquinas takes a deep look at the various interpretations, and here he looks at the Reverence Theory.

But, according to Jerome and Origen, he did not suspect adultery: for Joseph knew Mary’s chastity; he read in Scripture that a virgin would conceive: “And there shall come forth a rod (virga) out of the root of Jesse, and a flower shall rise up out of his root,” etc., (Isaias 7, 14 & 11, 1). He also knew that Mary had descended of the line of David. Hence, he more easily believed this to be fulfilled in her, than for her to have been ravished. And therefore, considering himself to be unworthy to dwell with one of so great holiness, he wanted to put her away privately, as Peter said: “Depart from me, O Lord, for I am a sinful man,” Luke 5, 8. Whence, he was not willing to take her, that is to lead her home to himself, and accept her as a spouse, thinking himself to be unworthy. Or, according to the opinion of others, being unaware of the purpose, he did so lest he be held guilty if he concealed the matter, and kept her with himself.[4]

Jimmy Akin in his article Why Did Joseph Plan to Divorce Mary also goes through some of the different views along with what then-Pope Benedict XVI wrote in his book Jesus of Nazareth: The Infancy Narratives.

The late Fr. William Most seems to have preferred the Perplexity Theory:

He had several options: he could denounce her to the tribunal to annul the engagement; he could keep her and celebrate the marriage itself; he could repudiate her in public, but without asking for any punishment, or he could do it privately before two witnesses without having to give a motive, and without dating the bill of rejection, to save her honor. It is this last option that Joseph was planning to use, for he was “just”, that is, a man who did everything that was morally rightsuch is the sense of Hebrew sedaqah and sadiq. He was interiorly convinced of her honor and moral rightness even though he could not reconcile that with the pregnancy. If he did not have that conviction he might have publicly repudiated her. But in divine matters at times we meet two conclusions which clearly clash. Then we should hold to both without straining either one until finally, we hope, a solution may appear.

Regardless, we do not have a magisterial teaching on this. I prefer the Reverence Theory, a preference in that is the one I most want to be correct.

Most importantly, is that Joseph was obedient to God’s word he was given through the Angel. That he would continue to be obedient and provide a pivotal role as the Guardian of the Redeemer.

In St. John Paul II’s Apostolic Exhortation “Redemptoris Custos,” he writes in the introduction:

Inspired by the Gospel, the Fathers of the Church from the earliest centuries stressed that just as St. Joseph took loving care of Mary and gladly dedicated himself to Jesus Christ’s upbringing, he likewise watches over and protects Christ’s Mystical Body, that is, the Church, of which the Virgin Mary is the exemplar and model.

In this way the whole Christian people not only will turn to St. Joseph with greater fervor and invoke his patronage with trust, but also will always keep before their eyes his humble, mature way of serving and of “taking part” in the plan of salvation.
…
I am convinced that by reflection upon the way that Mary’s spouse shared in the divine mystery, the Church – on the road towards the future with all of humanity—will be enabled to discover ever anew her own identity within this redemptive plan, which is founded on the mystery of the Incarnation.

This is precisely the mystery in which Joseph of Nazareth “shared” like no other human being except Mary, the Mother of the Incarnate Word. He shared in it with her; he was involved in the same salvific event; he was the guardian of the same love, through the power of which the eternal Father “destined us to be his sons through Jesus Christ” (Eph 1:5).[5]

From the Catechism paragraph §497:

The gospel accounts understand the virginal conception of Jesus as a divine work that surpasses all human understanding and possibility:“That which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit,” said the angel to Joseph about Mary his fiancée. The Church sees here the fulfillment of the divine promise given through the prophet Isaiah: “Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son.”[6]

Sources

• St. Thomas Aquinas “Commentary on the Gospel of St. Matthew”
• The Ignatius Catholic Study Bible꞉ The New Testament
• The Father William Most Collection
• Apostolic Exhortation, Redemptoris Custos, “Guardian of the Redeemer”
• Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd Edition
• Photo by Ben White on Unsplash

---

1. St. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, A.D. 396, (Enchir c. 40.) Catena Aurea: Commentary on the Four Gospels, Collected out of the Works of the Fathers: St. Matthew (J. H. Newman, Ed.; Vol. 1, pp. 43–44)  ↩
2. St. Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on the Gospel of St. Matthew, Dolorosa Press, 2012
   :[7] Ignatius Catholic Study Bible: New Testament
3. St. Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on the Gospel of St. Matthew, Dolorosa Press, 2012  ↩
4. Pope John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation, Redemptoris Custos, 1989, August 15  ↩
5. Catholic Church. (2000). Catechism of the Catholic Church (2nd Ed). United States Catholic Conference.  ↩
6. 5  ↩