Dear Elrafa:

Well, it is difficult to evaluate the Bishop's words without knowing the whole context of what he said and the exact words he used.

Responding only to the words in your post, Joseph did facilitate the birth of Jesus in the sense that he did not put away Mary as he could have when he found out she was pregnant, and marrying her which then made the birth of Jesus legally legitimate.

But Joseph has nothing to do with the conception of Jesus and thus Jesus was not born of Mary and Joseph, but born of Mary. He is using confusing terminology unnecessarily.

As for the Trinity, it is true that God is family -- God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.

As for Matthew 1:16 which reads, "And Jacob begot Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ" is part of a genealogy. The context and grammar show that "of whom Jesus was born..." refers to Mary alone. It identifies who this Mary was identifies that this Joseph was the Joseph who was married to our Blessed Mother. This verse does not support the idea of "Jesus born of Mary and Joseph".

The Latin Vulgate of this verse is: "Iacob autem genuit Ioseph virum Mariae de qua natus est Iesus qui vocatur Christus" which is rendered accurately in the Douay Rheims quoted above.

The Greek text reads:  ᾿Ιακὼβ δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν ᾿Ιωσὴφ τὸν ἄνδρα Μαρίας, ἐξ ἧς ἐγεννήθη ᾿Ιησοῦς ὁ λεγόμενος Χριστός.

The English rendering is pretty accurate to both the Greek and the Latin.

I am not a Latin or Greek scholar by any means, but it is clear from those who are that "of whom was born Jesus" modifies Mary and not Mary and Joseph together.

God Bless,
Bro. Ignatius Mary