Okay,
we have all heard this Gospel story many, many, many times. Probably
several times every year, depending on how many carol services we’ve
been to, or listened to on the radio, or watched on television! It’s
part of the great cycle of nine lessons and carols without which no
Christmas is complete.
So
we let it wash over us. “The birth of Jesus was in this wise….”
yadda, yadda, yadda. We knew it all before.
But,
you know, it really is a most extraordinary story. We know that
Matthew tells his version of the nativity from Joseph’s point of
view, while Luke tells his from Mary’s, and that there are several
very significant differences between the two versions. In fact,
Luke’s version of events is so different you sometimes wonder
whether they are talking about the same thing.
In
Matthew,
we
find the Holy Family living in Bethlehem,
fleeing
to Egypt,
and
then settling in Nazareth,
well
out of reach of Herod’s descendants.
But
Luke tells us that the family lived in Nazareth in the first place,
went
to Bethlehem for the census,
and,
far from avoiding Jerusalem,
called
in there on their way back to Nazareth!
And,
indeed, went there each year for the festivals –
I
wonder, don’t you, whether they stayed with Mary’s cousin
Elisabeth
and
whether Jesus and John played together as children?
And
while Luke has the shepherds visiting the manger, Matthew has eastern
astrologers calling in at the house to worship the child.
Not
that it matters.
We
all rationalise the two stories into one,
and
add our own extraneous bits –
the
ox and the ass, for instance,
are
figments of people’s imaginations, not part of the Luke’s
account.
Even
the stable – the manger may well have been separating the
dwelling-house from the animal-house, rather than in a separate
stable as we envisage it.
But
from Matthew’s telling of it, the Holy Family lived in Bethlehem
anyway and didn’t need to use a stable!
But
that doesn’t matter now.
What
does matter, is that Joseph was a righteous man. A righteous man, in
the Bible, is one who always tries his hardest to do what he believed
God wanted. Job is another “righteous man”, and I’m sure there
were others in the Bible, but I can’t think of them off-hand right
now. Anyway, Joseph always wanted to do what was right in God’s
eyes. And now, suddenly, his world is torn apart. Mary, to whom he
was betrothed – and a betrothal back then is far more binding than
an engagement today – Mary is expecting a child, and it isn’t
his.
I do
wonder, don’t you, why Mary didn’t go and discuss the angel’s
visit to her with Joseph before saying “Yes”. Although, come to
think of it, Luke doesn’t mention Joseph at that stage, but has
Mary saying that she can’t possibly get pregnant because she
doesn’t have a lover. Joseph only appears in the next chapter as
her husband.
Anyway, she didn’t. She accepted God’s request that she bear “a
son, who
will be great and will be called the Son of the Most
High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, and
he will reign over Jacob’s descendants forever; his kingdom will
never end.”
And
there she is, and what is Joseph to do? A righteous man, in those
days, would probably go to the rabbis and seek guidance from
Scripture, and ask what they thought. Back then, they didn’t have
the written guidance that
Jews have today, known as the Talmud, because it hadn’t been
written down, but the rabbis knew, and remembered, what earlier
generations had said about the Law. And in this case it was very
clear: if your wife, whether married or betrothed, betrayed you, she
was to be stoned to death. The man wasn’t, of course – that sort
of law didn’t apply to him! He might have to pay a fine to the
husband, and he might be required to marry the girl (assuming she
hadn’t been stoned first), but he certainly didn’t face death.
That, I’m afraid was and remains the reality for all too many
women.
Anyway,
Joseph is kind-hearted. He knows he can’t marry Mary, but he
really can’t bring himself to agree that she be stoned to death.
So he decides – and I expect he sought the rabbis’ approval –
to quietly end the betrothal and send her back to her parents. She
would just have to cope as best she could. If they threw her out –
as well they might – she would have to go on the streets or starve.
But
then God intervenes, and tells Joseph to marry Mary anyway, because
it was he, God himself, who was the father of the coming child. Did
that really make it better? It was God who had betrayed him with his
future wife? Seriously? And that was supposed to make it all right?
Hmph. Joseph wasn’t impressed. I should think he was very angry
with God, and probably said so in no uncertain terms. Fortunately,
it’s okay to be angry with God – I’m sure we have all been, at
one time or another. And that’s fine. God understands. God knows
that we need to express our anger in order to get rid of it, and not
let it fester and turn to depression.
Poor
Joseph. He is a righteous man, but he has to choose between obeying
God’s call and going on being seen as righteous. We may or may not
have trouble believing that Mary’s baby was conceived by the Holy
Spirit – after all, we say we believe it whenever we say the Creed
– but I’m quite sure that nobody in first-century Bethlehem would
have believed it. And if Joseph had tried to tell people, it
might have been his turn to have been stoned, this time for
blasphemy!
God
does confound our expectations in this story. You might expect the
Messiah to be born to a righteous man – but would you expect him to
have to choose between doing God’s will and being righteous? God
is continually turning our world upside down like that – or should
be!
When
I was young, there was a book by a man called J B Phillips, entitled
“Your God is too small”. I don’t know whether it’s still in
print, but it was excellent, I seem to remember. Phillips showed how
most of us tried to keep God small enough that our minds could
encompass what it was all about. But, of course, you can’t do
that. I mean, you can do that, of course, and we all tend to, but if
we do, what we are worshipping isn’t God. Similarly, we tend to
put God in boxes, telling each other that God always
does thus and so – but that’s not true, either, as this story
shows.
God
required a righteous man to marry a woman who was pregnant, not by
another man, which would have been bad enough, but by God himself!
We think that God has laid
down rules for sexual morality – but is God bound by those rules?
Doesn’t look like it, does it? What if God’s rules are actually
less rigid than we think? Of course, Jesus told us that we mustn’t
use people just for their bodies, but then, that isn’t applying
here. Mary has said “Yes” to God, and trusts God enough to
believe he’ll do the right thing by her and she won’t end up on
the streets. And Joseph trusted God enough to believe he would
enable him to live down the scandal of marrying a woman carrying, so
it was thought, another man’s child.
I
don’t know if you’ve ever read the genealogies that comprise the
first half of this first chapter of Matthew? If you have, you’ll
notice that while mostly it was so-and-so was the father of someone
else, on a very few occasions the name of the mother is given. And
every time, every single time, there is some scandal attached to that
woman. Tamar was a daughter-in-law of Judah, who was a childless
widow and who should then have married Judah’s youngest son, but
Judah refused to arrange this. So Tamar, who was furious, pretended
to be a prostitute and made a bargain with Judah for a goat, and his
seal and stick as a deposit on the goat. Then she stopped
pretending, and nobody could find her to give her the goat. But when
Judah heard that Tamar was pregnant, he ordered her to be burnt –
but changed his mind sharpish when she sent him back his seal and
stick and said that he was the father!
Rahab,
the mother of Boaz, really was a prostitute. And Ruth, of course, is
a Gentile, an outsider, a Muggle, if you like, who seduces Boaz to
get him to marry her. And then there was Bathsheba, who committed
adultery with David while she was still married to Uriah, and later
marries David and is the mother of Solomon. Nevertheless, she was
probably not as virtuous a woman as all that…. David could have had
any woman he wanted, so I expect he probably accepted “No” for an
answer. But we’ll never know.
The
point is, none of these women were the virtuous women whose price,
the book of Proverbs tells us, is above rubies. And yet they played
a vital part in the genealogy of Jesus. God
has confounded our expectations yet again! The virtuous, righteous
women are just in the nameless ruck – it is the outsiders who are
named and cherished.
Outsiders.
I
know that the church has an incredibly bad reputation when it comes
to welcoming outsiders – you only have to consider what happened
when those who had come over on the Empire Windrush appeared in
church their first Sunday in London. But that was not of God. God
is the one who welcomes the outsider, the outcast. Jesus spoke to
the woman at the well when nobody else would – and his disciples
were shocked and horrified.
I
wonder how good we are today at welcoming outsiders. What if a gay
or lesbian couple turned up at church on Christmas Day? What if a
Muslim family, seeking somewhere to worship, turned up? What if….
I know I’m not good at coping if someone drunk wanders in, seeking
money – and yet God might have sent that person just to confound
our expectations.
God
confounded our expectations by having the Messiah born of an
unmarried woman – well, carried by an unmarried woman, I should
say, as she and Joseph appear to have been married before Jesus was
actually born. He then proceeded to confound them still further by
having outsiders be the first to be told the news, and to come and
worship him. The shepherds, in their own way, were as much outsiders
as the magi.
And
God continues to confound our expectations today. Are you ready for
that to happen? When we sing “O holy child of Bethlehem, be born
in us today?” are you ready for that to happen. Or when we sing
“Fit us for heaven, to live with thee there”, are you ready for
God to fit you, indeed for heaven. Because it won’t be in the way
you expect! Amen.
No comments:
Post a Comment