Son and Daughter of David

This past Saturday, we celebrated the Feast of the Nativity of Mary, and the Gospel reading was the genealogy of Jesus according to Matthew. Now the question is, why read the genealogy of Jesus (which traces Joe's lineage, not Mary's) on the feast of Mary's Nativity?

Tomorrow, we will celebrate the Memorial of St. John Chrysostom, the great Greek Doctor and Father of the Church. It seems to me an appropriate time to share his thoughts on the importance of Joseph's lineage and perhaps an explanation for reading Joe's genealogy for Mary's birth. This is from his second homily on the Gospel of Matthew (7-8). As a side note, he also mentions a "mystical" reason for Joseph's lineage in this homily; you can read it in the third homily.

"But [how] is it manifest that [Christ] is of David? one may say. For if He was not sprung of a man, but from a woman only, and the Virgin has not her genealogy traced, how shall we know that He was of David's race? Thus, there are two things inquired; both why His mother's genealogy is not recited, and wherefore it can be that Joseph is mentioned by them, who has no part in the birth: since the latter seems to be superfluous, and the former a defect.

Of which then is it necessary to speak first? How the Virgin is of David. How then shall we know that she is of David? Hearken unto God, telling Gabriel to go unto a virgin betrothed to a man (whose name was Joseph), of the house and lineage of David (Luke 1:27). What now would you have plainer than this, when you have heard that the Virgin was of the house and lineage of David?

Hence it is evident that Joseph also was of the same. Yes, for there was a law, which bade that it should not be lawful to take a wife from any other stock, but from the same tribe (Numbers 36:6-9). And the patriarch Jacob also foretold that He should arise out of the tribe of Judah, saying [that] there shall not fail a ruler out of Judah, nor a governor out of his loins, until He come for whom it is appointed, and He is the expectation of the Gentiles (Genesis 49:10).

Well; this prophecy does indeed make it clear that He was of the tribe of Judah, but not also that He was of the family of David. Was there then in the tribe of Judah one family only, even that of David, or were there not also many others? And might it not happen for one to be of the tribe of Judah, but not also of the family of David?

Nay, lest you should say this, the evangelist has removed this suspicion of yours, by saying, that He was of the house and lineage of David.

And if you wish to learn this from another reason besides, neither shall we be at a loss for another proof. For not only was it not allowed to take a wife out of another tribe, but not even from another lineage, that is, from another kindred. So that if either we connect with the Virgin the words, of the house and lineage of David, what has been said stands good; or if with Joseph, by that fact this also is proved. For if Joseph was of the house and lineage of David, he would not have taken his wife from another than that whence he himself was sprung.

What then, one may say, if he transgressed the law? Why, for this cause he has by anticipation testified that Joseph was righteous, on purpose that you might not say this, but having been told his virtue, might be sure also that he would not have transgressed the law. For he who was so benevolent, and free from passion, as not to wish, even when urged by suspicion, to attempt inflicting punishment on the Virgin, how should he have transgressed the law for lust? He that showed wisdom and self-restraint beyond the law (for to put her away, and that privily, was to act with self-restraint beyond the law), how should he have done anything contrary to the law; and this when there was no cause to urge him?

Now that the Virgin was of the race of David is indeed from these things evident; but wherefore he gave not her genealogy, but Joseph's, requires explanation. For what cause was it then? It was not the law among the Jews that the genealogy of women should be traced. In order then that he might keep the custom, and not seem to be making alterations from the beginning, and yet might make the Virgin known to us, for this cause he has passed over her ancestors in silence, and traced the genealogy of Joseph. For if he had done this with respect to the Virgin, he would have seemed to be introducing novelties; and if he had passed over Joseph in silence, we should not have known the Virgin's forefathers. In order therefore that we might learn, touching Mary, who she was, and of what origin, and that the laws might remain undisturbed, he has traced the genealogy of her espoused husband, and shown him to be of the house of David. For when this has been clearly proved, that other fact is demonstrated with it, namely, that the Virgin likewise is sprung from thence, by reason that this righteous man, even as I have already said, would not have endured to take a wife from another race."