We know the Christmas story, as it is reported in Matthew 1 and Luke 2, quite well. But there is a problem. Not so much with the story, but with our reading, hearing, and understanding of that story. Here, it seems, the more familiar we are with the story, the more difficult it becomes to erase certain elements that have influenced our interpretation and understanding of the story.

Some of these misinterpretations may be the result of cultural differences: we hear this story of old with modern ears, and therefore miss some of the textual nuances. (The following textual explanations are based on the observations of Kenneth Bailey author, theologian, and expert in Middle Eastern New Testament studies.)

For instance, the word manger makes us think of a stable or barn. After all, this is where we expect to find a feeding trough for the cattle. At the time of Jesus' birth, Palestinian peasants commonly lived in a one-room home. (Sometimes, they had a separate, second [upper] room for guests.) They usually kept their live-stock in their homes during the night. This shows in the living arrangements. The homes were often constructed with an upper level to be used as the family living room. The ground-level slightly below was reserved for the animals. Built into the floor were wooden or stone feeding troughs (mangers) with sturdy sloping sides that could serve as a cradle.

He is probably the most neglected, if not the most misunderstood character in the Christmas story. In most Christmas skits he is present but he usually only has a marginal role. I am talking about Joseph.

One child, when asked if he was a shepherd at a Christmas pageant, answered, “No, I am Joseph. I don't have to do anything or say anything. I just get to stand there.” This pretty much sums it all up. Right?

In addition, Joseph also comes across as oblivious: According to the Christmas story in Matthew 1, an angel had to tell him that his fiancée Mary was pregnant, and God – through the power of the Holy Spirit – was the Father. ('Yeah, right,' we are tempted to say as modern-day and biologically enlightened people.)

Joseph, it seems, is furthermore lacking compassion: He waited pretty much until the moment of the child's birth before he took his betrothed on the journey to the town of his ancestors, Bethlehem.

And finally, he was forgetful: He failed to make reservations on orbitz.com to book a room, and he did not go the website of the Roman administration for Judea to download the PDF-form for the census.

I would like to argue that Joseph deserves more attention, that he should be regarded in a more favorable light, that there is actually “something” about him.

 The Evangelist Matthew portrays Joseph as a character whose reaction was one of complete openness, confidence, and acceptance. Matthew presents Joseph as a man who practiced hospitality. He opened his heart, his home, his whole future to the intervention (or shall we say: intrusion?) of the divine. After that, his life would not be the same. The same welcome, which he extended to Jesus, the Son of God, he also extended to Mary, whose future so much depended on Joseph's compassion, acceptance, and favor towards her … due to the circumstances she had found herself in as a not-yet-married young woman.

 With that in mind, we can state that Joseph actually protected Mary. He offered a number of courtesies to her. He did not “dismiss” her when he found out that she was pregnant. No, he safeguarded her reputation and welfare. He did not only give Mary his name, but, by staying by her side and legally taking on the child (she gave birth to) as his, he also put this child into the line of King David, from whose lineage the promised Messiah was believed to come.

The dedication and commitment to Mary was so complete that, when he traveled to Bethlehem for the census (as recorded in Luke 2), he took her along – because she was family now – instead of leaving her behind in Nazareth. Instead of seeing him as a man who foolishly dragged along a very pregnant Mary on a long and strenuous trip, we should see in him a man who had so welcomed the Holy Spirit (and the fruit of the Holy Spirit) into his life that he took this young woman for his wife without any reservations or ill feelings.

The Roman-forced family reunion gave Joseph an opportunity to introduce Mary to his relatives in Bethlehem – to establish the ties of kinship, which were (and are) quite important in the Middle East. Just as Joseph welcomed Mary and her child into his life, so Joseph's own relatives surely extended the hospitality of their home to the young couple. No effort would have been spared to welcome them and to help them. To turn away visiting relatives was unthinkable. However, if Mary had shown up, pregnant and alone in a strange town, the story might have ended differently. But she had Joseph's name and the status of his wife, making her pregnancy and delivery a joyful event within the context of extended family. (In the December issue of the church newsletter, I explained that, because the separate guest chamber was already occupied, the relatives invited them to stay with them in their regular living quarters.)

Joseph was more than just being aloof, or simply a passive bystander of the events surrounding the birth of Jesus. To the contrary, his obedience and acceptance of every word spoken to him by the angelic messenger (see Matthew 1) enabled every facet of the Christmas event to come to fulfillment. Thus, the unfolding of God's messianic plan rested, to a large extent, also in the hands and the determination of Joseph.

  Blessings to you as we enter a New Year,
  Bjoern E. Meinhardt, Pastor