We read every year, in the Gospel (Matt. I, 18-21) of his feast, the 19th of March, that Saint Joseph was a just man: justus[1]. In the language of Holy Scripture, to be deemed righteous required much more than simply average moral rectitude, or mere innocence from any major faults, coupled with a certain general kindliness. In biblical language, the just man was one "... whose will was perfectly subject to God, ... possessing not only the virtue of justice, but endowed also with all the supernatural virtues"[2] - a saint of the Old Testament. The necessity, willed by God, for a high degree of holiness in Saint Joseph should hardly surprise us, considering the greatness of his vocation as "spouse of the Mother of God" and "diligent protector of Christ"[3]. Because of the dignity of his mission, "it was necessary", in the words of Saint Leonard de Port Maurice, "that Joseph should already be the greatest soul ever to appear in the world, after the Blessed Virgin"[4].

But did Saint Joseph’s faith - by which, as a just man, he lived[5] - totally exclude any questioning on his part? Up against the mystery of the virginal conception of his immaculate bride, could Joseph have had moments of uncertainty? Is it possible that he doubted Mary’s integral purity?

Some might ask this very question, and affirm it as a possibility. The Gospel recalls how Joseph, realizing that the Blessed Virgin was with child, yet "... not willing publicly to expose her, was minded to put her away privately"[6]. It was only after an angel appeared to him in a dream[7], explaining the divine origin of Mary's unexpected maternity, that Joseph resolved to take her as his wife. One could infer from this text that Joseph must therefore have entertained doubts, that he suspected a possible guilt on Mary's part - and that it was only the heavenly messenger who appeased him, bringing him to understand that "the child conceived in her was of the Holy Ghost"[8]. For if Joseph had known from the beginning that Mary had become a mother by "the power of the Most High overshadowing her"[9], why would he even have thought of repudiating her?

When in doubt as to how to interpret the Bible, the Catholic turns to the Church. He holds, as the First Vatican Council puts it, for "... the true meaning of Sacred Scripture, that which our Holy Mother the Church has always held", resting upon the "unanimous sentiment of the Fathers"[10]. To know whether Saint Joseph could have doubted Mary's conjugal fidelity, one must seek to know the Church’s mind on the matter.

Most of the Church Fathers[11] seem to state almost unequivocally[12] that Joseph never doubted Mary's perpetual virginity. Expressing the most common opinion of the Fathers, Saint Ephraem (306-373) excludes its plausibility in these words:

"Now Joseph understood that this conception was unique, that it was an event foreign to the ordinary laws of life and to the conceptions which are the fruit of marriage. All these signs (i.e. the silence of Zacharias, the conception of Elizabeth, the angel’s announcement, the joy of John and the prophecy of his fathers) led him to recognize that the thing came from God. Never, and nowhere, had he suspected some shameless design in her."[13]

A careful re-reading of the Gospel text will point out the absence of the word "doubt" in the matthean account of the virginal conception. If Saint Joseph's faith had faltered, surely the angel could have reproached him, like Our Lord did Saint Peter: "O man of little faith, why didst thou doubt?[14]" But the angel addresses, not a doubt in Joseph, but a fear: "Joseph, son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife."[15] Saint Ephraem specifies the nature and demonstrates the virtuous root of this fear of Saint Joseph: 

"He especially thought of sending her away, so as not to commit a sin by allowing himself to be called the father of the divine child. He feared to live with her, for fear of dishonouring the name of the Virgin’s Son."[16]

Several Fathers[17] further underline Joseph's decision to do no more than send Mary away. Indeed, the Mosaic Law allowed divorce in certain cases of incompatibility or repugnance between the spouses[18], but required that any adulterous woman be stoned[19]. If he had believed Mary to have been unfaithful, Joseph should not, in justice, have repudiated her, but have had her stoned. The Doctor of the Syriacs explains:

"In his justice, he thought to send her away in secret. If he had known that this conception did not come from the Spirit, it would have been disloyalty on his part not to denounce it publicly. He understood that this was an admirable work of God; however, as it was unacceptable to others, he believed to himself that the dismissal was justice."[20]

Knowing his spouse to be a virgin, Saint Joseph was himself a virgin as well, as Saint Bede the Venerable states[21]. How could Joseph, prior to the angel’s apparition, explain the origin of the child Mary bore in her womb? An eighteenth-century commentator suggested: "Joseph believed that what he saw in Mary was the consequence of some act of violence she had suffered, or from some other cause unknown to him."[22] Saint Bernard of Clairvaux[23] maintained that Joseph had always attributed, by previous revelation, the miraculous fruitfulness of Mary to the working of the Holy Ghost[24]. Saint Bridget of Sweden, in her Revelations[25], shares this same opinion, as do other renowned theologians of centuries past[26]. Others claim that Joseph was unaware of the divine origin of the conception, but that "... despite outward appearances, he was deeply certain that Mary had in nowise willed to compromise her purity."[27] In the end, almost all seem to hold that Joseph never suspected any guilt on Mary's part.

Considering the quasi-universal consensus of these ecclesiastical voices whose opinions are of such notable importance in the Church’s esteem, one would seem be "thinking with the Church"[28] in believing that the faith of Saint Joseph remained ever intact, without the least shadow of a doubt on his part. Before the mystery of the Virgin with Child, Joseph did not doubt; he believed, he trusted in Divine Providence, Whose "ways and thoughts were high exalted above"[29] his own. Such seems, to us, to be the most pious opinion.

However, the Catholic is perfectly free to concur or not. In the absence of a dogmatic declaration coming from the Magisterium, or of a truly unanimous sentiment among the Fathers, one or the other of the opinions may be maintained in good conscience, since neither of the two has been imposed or condemned by the Church. The Latin adage applies here: "in dubiis libertas"; "in doubtful things, liberty".

[1] Matth. I, 19

[2] St John Chrysostome, Homil. IV in Matth., c. 3. – cit. in Saint Joseph : Époux de la Très Sainte Vierge Marie (S.E. Alexis Henri M. Lépicier, O.S.M.) Éd. P. Lethielleux, 1932, p. 174

[3] Invocations taken from the Litany of St Joseph

[4] Cit. in Saint Joseph: Époux de Marie, Éd. Traditions Monastiques, 1996, p. 44

[5] Heb. X, 38

[6] Matth. I, 19

[7] Matth. I, 20-24

[8] Matth. I, 20

[9] Luc. I, 35

[10] Conc. Vatic. Constit. Dei Filius, c. 2.

[11] We refer to as “the Fathers of the Church” the holy theologians of the first centuries of the Christian Era (i.e. from St Ignatius of Antioch [35-108] until St John Damascene [675-749]), whose writings and interpretation of Sacred Scripture the Church judges, by reason of their temporal proximity to the Apostles, to be of great value.

[12] Save, so it would seem, “…a few Fathers” (L. Pirot et A. Clamer, La Sainte Bible : traduction française avec un commentaire exégétique et thélogique, Éd. Letouzey et Ané, 1950, tome IX, p. 7)

[13] L. Leloir, Saint Ephrem, Diatessaron II, Éd. Cerf, 1966, p. 68

[14] Matth. XIV, 31

[15] Matth. I, 20

[16] L. Leloir, op. cit.

[17] Including Origene (185-253) and St Basil the Great (329-379) (cf. Cornelius a Lapide, Commentaria in Scripturam Sacram : Tomus XV – commentaria in Matthaeum, cap. I, vers. 19)

[18] Deut. XXIV, 1-4

[19] Deut. XXII, 22-24

[20] L. Leloir, op. cit.

[21] “We should know that not only the Blessed Mother of God, but also the most blessed witness and gardian of her chastity, Joseph, was also exempt from any conjugal act.” (L. II, in Marc., c. 23). This Anglo-Saxon Doctor of the Church lived from 672 to 735.

[22] Dom Calmet, Commentaire littéral sur tous les livres de l’Ancien et du Nouveau Testament : L’Évangile de Saint Matthieu, Éd. Paris, 1725, p. 16

[23] Cistercian Abbot of Clairvaux and Doctor of the Univeral Church (1090-1153)

[24] Hom. II, super Missus est

[25] L. VIII, c. 25

[26] Among them, “the pious” Jean Gerson (1363 – 1429): Serm. II, de Nativ. Chancellor of the Cathedral of Notre-Dame-de-Paris in the 15th Century, Gerson was renowned, among other distinctions, as a “josephologist”, having penned a large theological treatise – “Considerations on Saint Joseph” – and preached numerous sermons on the subject at the Council of Constance.

[27] J. Galot, S.J. Saint Joseph, Éd. Desclée de Brouwer, 1962, p. 26

[28] “Sentire cum Ecclesia”: famous expression employed by St. Ignatius of Loyola in his Spiritual Exercises; to share the mindset of the Church and hold her thought as one’s one

[29] Isaias LV, 9