When Mary awoke from her ecstasy, in which saints have asserted that she was raised to the intuitive and beatific vision of God, she comprehended the dignity of her lot and how He that was Mighty had done to her great things. To this exaltation she responded by plunging herself deeply into the thought of her own nothingness. Humbly prostrate with her face on the ground, she long adored within herself the majesty and goodness of God, whom with maternal tenderness she could now also invoke by the sweet name of son. But we must not imagine that Mary had a vision only of joy and glory. She had pondered well all the prophecies concerning the Messias, how He was to be offered for the redemption of a sinful world, and cannot have failed to be familiar in particular with the description of His sufferings given by Isaias, who has been styled the fifth Evangelist, and the detailed reference to them which abounds in the Psalms of her own kingly ancestor, David. The shadow of the Cross must have lain upon her, and a vision of the lance and the nails, and all the ignominies and torments of the Passion must have arisen before her. But, like her Divine Son, who, when coming into the world to offer Himself as the true sacrifice for sin, said, “Behold I come, to do Thy will, O God; I have desired it, and Thy law is in the midst of My heart,”1 so also Mary accepted all the suffering and the agony which was to be her portion, the Holy Spirit strengthening and supporting her by the certainty of the immense good which the whole human race would derive from the Passion and Death of the Incarnate Son of God. Nevertheless, if by the power of divine grace Mary ever continued strong, resigned, and tranquil, still, in the very midst of these her maternal joys the sword which was one day to pierce her soul must have been visible to her even before Simeon’s prophecy had been addressed to her. So much was the world’s salvation to cost Mary!
Meanwhile, Joseph as yet knew nothing of the sublime dignity to which his spouse had been exalted. Mary met him as usual, with the same loving reverence, kneeling down to wash his feet when he returned wearied with his labors; but we are fain to believe that he must have experienced an undefined impression of veneration for her, and would have preferred to cast himself humbly at her feet. If favored souls are sometimes sensibly conscious of the presence of the Blessed Sacrament in our churches, how much more must holy Joseph, whose spiritual senses were so delicate and refined, have felt his heart burn within him with divine charity, from the nearness of Him who now dwelt in Mary as His living tabernacle! But she said nothing; perhaps was even more silent than was her custom. She went about her usual employments, she prepared the frugal meal, and all was the same, yet not the same, for a glory must have shone in the countenance of the august Mother, and a fragrance of Paradise have pervaded that lowly dwelling. But why did not Mary confide in Joseph, for hitherto he had been the depositary of all her thoughts? First, because the secret which the angel had revealed to her she understood to have been intended for herself alone, wherefore she would not communicate it even to Joseph, fearing to go beyond the Divine will. Moreover, the Virgin was possessed of much discretion and forethought. If she made known to him that the Son of God had become incarnate within her, she knew, indeed, that he would believe her, but she knew also his humility and reverent spirit, and may have thought that, awed by so much majesty, he would perhaps retire and leave her. She waited therefore until the mystery should be divinely manifested to him; and, finally, being herself perfect in humility, she dared not utter any word which would turn to her own praise.
And so Mary kept silence; she knew that it is “good to hide the secret of the King,” but she knew also that it is “honorable to reveal and confess the works of God”.2 Accordingly, while concealing the mystery that had been accomplished in her, to wit, the Incarnation of the Divine Word, she acquainted her beloved spouse with the prodigy which God had wrought in their cousin Elizabeth, and with her desire to go and congratulate her on the favor which had been shown her. Zachary’s dumbness, with which it seems probable they were well acquainted, since it was now of six months’ duration, must have made him also worthy to receive a visit of sympathy from them both, bound as they were to the holy couple, not only by ties of kindred, but by intimate association. Zachary’s frequent presence in Jerusalem, where he came to serve in his sacerdotal course, must naturally have brought this about; and, though Scripture makes no mention of it, we have reason to conclude that, during Mary’s abode in the Temple, she must have become closely united in affection with her saintly cousin, Elizabeth. Anyhow, Joseph, who considered the smallest wish of Mary as a law to himself, was sure to give his ready consent. St. Luke says that Mary, “rising up in those days, went into the hill country with haste, into a city of Juda,”3 by which we are not to understand that she set out that very day, the haste alluding rather to the rapidity of the journey. The Evangelist says, “in those days,” not “that day,” and Cornelius à Lapide is of opinion that there was a delay of two or three days. We can well understand that such might be necessary in order to make some few slight preparations.
But wherefore did Mary undertake this journey, and make it with haste? Heretics, with their habitual and injurious rashness, reply that she made this fatiguing journey in order to ascertain with her own eyes if what the angel had announced to her was true; thus making the Blessed Virgin incredulous or doubtful concerning his message to herself. “But no,” exclaims St. Bernard; “Mary was neither incredulous nor doubtful of the truth of the angel’s words.”4 She fully believed, and promptly gave her assent; and on this account she was praised for her faith by Elizabeth herself. Mary went to visit her cousin that she might rejoice with and assist her, and God Himself disposed the journey in order to give occasion to all the prodigies which took place at this blessed Visitation. And the Virgin went with haste because, as St. Ambrose says, the grace of the Holy Spirit knows no delay. Mary, he adds, was neither incredulous nor uncertain on hearing the angel’s announcement, nor was she doubtful concerning the example he gave her of God’s omnipotence in the case of her cousin, Elizabeth; but, as one joyful at the mystery accomplished, pressed by charity to aid her kinswoman, and eager to rejoice with all in the common gladness, she took her way towards the mountainous country of Judea.5
Here some have raised a doubt, seeing the Evangelist does not name Joseph, whether he accompanied Mary on her visit. All are agreed that the most holy Virgin at her tender age cannot have exposed herself to making this long and arduous journey alone, but it has been opined that she may have taken as her companion some matron well acquainted with the road. Yet, if Joseph is to be excluded simply because Scripture does not name him, so also must the supposed matron be excluded, of whom not a word is said in the sacred text; and when it becomes a question of supposing who might have been Mary’s companion, certainly it is only reasonable to conclude that Joseph was the person. True, the Evangelist does not say that he went, but neither does he say that he did not go; nor, again, does he say that Mary went by herself. Not to mention a circumstance is, assuredly, not the same thing as to deny it; and this applies peculiarly to the Gospel narratives. Clearly they do not record everything, often leaving what they omit to be supplied by tradition, and even by reason and common sense. As for another objection which has been made, that, if Joseph had accompanied Mary, he would have heard Elizabeth’s testimony to the Incarnation, it has little, if any, force. It is not necessary to suppose, nor is it likely, that Joseph straightway followed Mary into the interior of the house. Those pictures which represent Elizabeth as meeting the Blessed Virgin at the threshold and saluting her are purely imaginary, and do not, in fact, accord with the Gospel statement; for St. Luke tells us6 that Mary “entered into the house of Zachary, and saluted Elizabeth”. Trombelli says that the opinion that Joseph was not introduced along with Mary into Elizabeth’s apartments receives a confirmation in the custom of Orientals, who assign separate rooms to the women of their families. Add to this, that the careful Joseph would never have allowed Mary to make this long and rugged journey entirely on foot, but would surely have taken with them an ass for her accommodation. He would, therefore, naturally on arriving have seen first to providing this animal with shelter, and then have sought his kinsman, Zachary.
But it is, in fact, the common belief that Joseph was Mary’s companion on this journey. One of the principal ends for which God gave him to her as her spouse was that he might always be to her a companion and guardian, a guide and protector, in all the various necessities and vicissitudes of life. This office had become for him a duty. It is impossible, then, to suppose that on this first grave occasion he could have failed to fulfill the obligation which God had laid upon him; towards her, too, whom he beyond measure loved, and whom he regarded as his greatest earthly treasure. Can we imagine his suffering her to go without him, exposed to all the perils of the road and to all its inconveniences and discomforts? Joseph, besides, was, as well as Mary, the near relative of Elizabeth, and as desirous as Mary herself to show her and her husband cordial affection. What would they have thought at seeing his wife arrive by herself? Friends and relatives, and, indeed, all who knew them, would assuredly have had cause to wonder, and to blame him for his indifference and neglect. And Mary, too, brought up in the sanctuary, far from the noise and tumult of the world, bashful and timid as a dove, who with trusting faith had united herself to Joseph, to be henceforth his inseparable companion, how could she ever have consented to leave him, and, moreover, for so long a time?
But it is needless to go in search of proof when we have the authority of saints and doctors on our side. St. Bernardine of Siena and St. Bernard are entirely agreed upon this point, and the latter enlarges on the blessedness of the house which contained such holy persons, and on the joy which Joseph, in particular, must have experienced in accompanying Mary on this journey. Isolano goes so far as to say that no rational person, or possessed of Catholic feeling, could admit for a moment that our Lady at that tender age went unattended, or that Joseph, for any cause whatever, could have allowed his virgin spouse to make so long a journey without accompanying her.7 Gerson, Vida, Echius, Cajetan, Salmeron, and the learned Suarez held the same opinion. We may close the list with St. Francis de Sales, who was so devout to the mystery of the Visitation that he desired that the Congregation of religious women which he founded should receive its name. He alludes to Joseph being Mary’s companion on the road as to an unquestionable fact. Speaking of Mary’s haste, mentioned by the Evangelist, he says that the first movements of Him whom she bore in her bosom must necessarily have been most fervent. “O holy eagerness,” he exclaims, “in which there is no disquiet, and which hastens without hurrying! Angels prepared to accompany her, and Joseph to be her willing guide. I would fain know something of the conversation between these two great souls; but I imagine Mary spoke only of Him of whom she was full, and breathed only the Savior; and St. Joseph on his part respired only after the Savior, who was darting secret rays into his heart, awakening in it a thousand inexplicable feelings, and, even as the wine enclosed in casks acquires insensibly the odor of the flowering vines, so the heart of this holy Patriarch experienced, without knowing how, the fragrance, the power, the strength of the Divine Infant who had blossomed in his fair vineyard. O my God, what a pilgrimage! The Savior serves them as staff, food, and drink.”8
It may have taken them three days to reach the city where Elizabeth and Zachary dwelt, which is commonly supposed to be Hebron. It was on the mountains of Judea, and was one of the sacerdotal cities of which the Lord, as we learn in the Book of Josue,9 allotted forty-eight to the tribe of Levi. The Evangelist calls it “a city of Juda,” which evidently designates only the name of the tribe to which it belonged, for there was no city of that name in Israel. There was, it is true, a city called Jota,10 which was also a sacerdotal city, on the mountains of Judea and near to Hebron. At the period of the Crusades, and even earlier, there was a popular local tradition that Zachary and Elizabeth dwelt at Ain-Carem, which the Catholic pilgrims called “St. John on the mountain,” and which was, perhaps, identical with the ancient Ain mentioned by Josue, in connection with Jota or Jeta,11 and distant from Jerusalem scarcely six miles. In favor of the claims of Ain-Carem are the sanctuary of the Visitation of Mary to Elizabeth existing there, and another pointed out as the birthplace of John the Baptist, as also the spot where he was concealed from the rage of Herod, and the desert and grotto where he abode from his tenderest years. But no written record remains to testify to any ancient tradition on the subject. The general opinion of Doctors is that the city of Juda mentioned by St. Luke is Hebron, the ancient Cariath-Arbe,12 a sacerdotal city, and one of the cities of refuge. It could boast of the highest antiquity, higher even, it has been said, than that of Memphis. It was the abode of the earliest Patriarchs, and when Abraham came into the land of Canaan, he pitched his tent near an oak by the plain of Mambre, which is in Hebron.13 There he received the three angelic guests, who came to promise to him, in the name of the Lord, that in his seed all the nations of the earth should be blessed. Here it was, as St. Jerome says, that he saw the day of Christ and rejoiced to see it. In Hebron David reigned seven years and six months, and there he was consecrated king in the presence of the ancients of all the tribes of Israel.14 But never had the hills of Hebron received so high an honor as when the Incarnate Word traversed them enclosed in the womb of the most pure Virgin, accompanied by David’s true heir and the greatest of patriarchs and saints, her holy spouse Joseph. The sacred bones of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Sara, Rebecca, and Lia, which lay buried in the double cave of Ephron,15 must have been moved within their tombs when Mary and Joseph approached and, in passing, piously saluted the venerable relics of their ancestors.