19 March—Today, we’re reminded by goodnews@franciscanmedia.org’s always informative Saints of the Day email, is the feast day of Saint Joseph, Husband of Mary and adoptive father of Jesus. Joseph actually has two feast days, the other being May Day, thanks to Pope Pius XII. Joseph is the patron saint of Belgium, Canada, carpenters, China, families, and fathers. It’s obvious why he’s the patron saint of carpenters, families, and fathers; but Belgium, Canada, and China?

Anyway, it’s been pretty well established, if only by apocryphal Gospels, that Joseph and Mary had been legally married according to Jewish law by the time Jesus was born. The canonical Gospels, particularly Matthew 1:18, on the other hand, are pretty certain that the couple weren’t married when Mary became pregnant, merely “espoused when they came together.” But, according to historians, Jewish engagement in those days was just about as good as marriage. (These days you don’t even have to be engaged.)

Not that any of it matters, of course, because Mary and Joseph were most certainly chosen by God for their special parenthood and God had more important things to worry about than a piece of papyrus, a few words, and breaking a glass. It’s likely, moreover, that Mary would have been a very good single mom even had Joseph not stuck around.

But that raises another issue. Matthew 1:19 tells us that “because Joseph [Mary’s] husband was faithful to the law, and yet did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly.” Besides public disgrace, in the good old days, according to Mosaic law, adultery (by women; men usually got away with it) was punishable by death by stoning.

Even back then a quiet divorce was more civilized than, say, the recent Heard-Depp freakshow. But if God didn’t advertise that he [or He] had begat Mary’s child, who was to know that as-good-as-husband Joseph wasn’t in fact the kid’s [or Kid’s] birth father? So why would Joseph even have contemplated broadcasting the holy paternity and/or a possible divorce?

If Joseph didn’t believe Mary’s frankly incredible story about the Annunciation and its aftermath, why would he have married the delusional girl in the first place? Matthew once again solves the enigma. It seems an angel appeared to Joseph in a dream and told him that the child Mary was carrying was not conceived with another man, but through the power of the Holy Spirit, and even told him to name the child Jesus. And who doesn’t believe dreams?

Lucky Freud wasn’t around. So it’s a given that Joseph couldn’t have lusted after Mary, because that wouldn’t jibe with holy chastity or chaste holiness. But was Joseph gullible, in love with Mary, or just a really nice guy?

That’s why he’s a saint . . .