been liable, had it stood alone, to the exception of her being an interested party. But in the case of Joseph, the presumption is all the other way. He had no interest, and could have no desire to give an undue colour to the transaction, or to represent it otherwise than as it really appeared to him. Instead of wishing to screen what he must, in the first instance, have considered the lamentable frailty of his betrothed wife, his regard to his own reputation as a man, and the honour of a husband, required, that he should remove from himself all suspicion of conniving at her supposed guilt; and this is precisely what he appears to have meditated, until a heavenly messenger was sent to apprize him of the truth.

St. Matthew who, as we have elsewhere stated, appears to have derived his information from Joseph, (without taking any notice of the circumstances narrated by Luke, apparently on the authority of Mary,) merely says, that "When as the mother of Jesus was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost."*

This was no doubt true; but Joseph could, at first, know nothing but the mere fact of her being with child. What passed between them on the subject we know not. Whether he made any inquiry, or received from her any detailed statement

*Matt. i. 18.

of the circumstances, is not mentioned, though it is extremely likely that such would be the case. But the explanation, if given, does not appear to have proved satisfactory, as the evangelist proceeds to state," Then Joseph, her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily."

Commentators have explained this to mean, that Joseph being a good man-humane as well as just -was not willing to bring his wife to a public trial for an offence, the punishment of which, by the Jewish law, was death by stoning! But there may have been other motives. As it is probable that Mary had stated to him, without disguise, the extraordinary and miraculous events which had occurred, although he could not at first, on her bare assertion, give implicit credit to a story so wonderful, he might still have a misgiving in his own mind, that after all, it might possibly be true. Were it to turn out so, he might be afraid, that by giving her up to the arm of the law, he might be guilty of a grievous crime, by exposing to outrage an innocent being, destined by God to the highest honour-even that of giving birth to the Messiah. If the matter be considered in this light, we will see that the course contemplated by Joseph, in the state of uncertainty he was then in, was not only the most consistent with justice, but almost the only one he could

follow with propriety, or by which he might escape from the dilemma in which he found himself placed. But his purpose was changed, and in the following

manner:

"But while he thought on these things, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, -Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife; for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

"And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus; for he shall save his people from their sins."

This dream, or vision, at once removed every doubt or scruple from the mind of Joseph. It corresponded with, and confirmed every particular in the statement of Mary-that that which was conceived in her was of the Holy Ghost-that she should bring forth a son, and that they should call his name Jesus.

All this had been previously announced to Mary, when the angel appeared to her.

The promises made to Mary, respecting the son she was to bear were, that he was to be called the Son of the Highest-that God should give him the throne of his father David, and that he should reign over the house of Jacob for ever; but to Joseph the words of the angel were, that he should save his people from their sins. Though these are appar

ently different characters, they were both characters attributed to the expected Messiah, and neither of them could leave any doubt on the mind of either Joseph or Mary, that the son thus promised to the latter was to be that Messiah.

We have here presented to us, not merely the testimony of Joseph as to the revelation made to to him-confirming, in every point, that previously vouchsafed to Mary-but we have the still stronger evidence, arising from the fact of a change being produced in his purposes and intentions. He now no longer thought of putting away his betrothed wife. Convinced, at once-not by mere human testimony-not by any process of reason, but by a direct revelation from heaven-of Mary's entire innocence, and that the whole matter was from God -he, without a moment's hesitation, took her home to his house.

"Then Joseph being raised from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife.

"And knew her not, till she had brought forth her first-born son; and he called his name Jesus."

We have here supplied the only fact necessary to prove that Mary remained a virgin till after the birth of the Saviour. This was necessary for the fulfilment of Isaiah's prophecy, that the virgin should not only conceive, but bear a son. But after this, it

was neither necessary nor proper that Mary, being united to a just and honourable man in the holy bond of marriage, should not live from thenceforth in the same state of chaste and blameless intercourse with her husband, as other married women. Some commentators have spent much useless labour, in endeavouring to prove that Mary remained a virgin during the whole of her life; but there is not only no good reason, but actually no reason at all for supposing that this was the case. On the contrary, all the intimations in Scripture which bear upon the subject, prove, as far as anything can prove, the reverse. After our Lord had commenced his public ministry, we are told by St. Matthew,* that "while he yet talked to the people, behold his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him." Again, we are told by the same evangelist, that when he came into his own country, the people would not believe in him, saying, "Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not his mother called Mary; and his brethern James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? And his sisters, are they not all with us?"†

There is no reason to suppose that his brethren and his sisters, were any other than the sons and daughters of Joseph and Mary. We are not told, and the known circumstances seem to exclude the

* Matt. xii. 46.

† Matt. xiii. 55, 56.