Lectionary Notebook Matthew 1:18-24

Thoughts on the Gospel Reading
4th Sunday of Advent, Year A
See TEXT below Matthew 1:18-24

The Gospel reading for the fourth Sunday of Advent offers us the crux of the matter, really. That is, the decisive or most important point at issue is the origin of Jesus. Naiveté demands we take the account St. Matthew offers at face value, while sophistication demands that we see here the override of myth.

What are we to think? Is this miraculous event even possible? Or, said more pointedly, do we believe out of our need?

Well, of course, we believe for any number of reasons, some of which are certainly self-serving, but does that truth necessarily mean that the miraculous does not occur? Or, could the incarnation actually have happened anyway, despite our need for it?

Can you imagine the look on Joseph's face when he discovers, by angelic declaration no less, that the unfaithful Mary had not been unfaithful after all? On the surface this would appear to make things easier for him, but only on the surface.

I try to put myself in his position if not his frame of mind. How would I have reacted had I learned of my betrothed's unfaithfulness, only then to be told that she would give birth to a child conceived by God? Which would be easier to believe, the natural explanation or the supernatural? No matter where the truth is to be found, the beginning of Jesus would forever be suspect; there would always be questions. How do you tell friends and neighbors, "Well, she really wasn’t unfaithful, he's really conceived by God!" The looks of skepticism that blare loudly through the centuries must have also been shrill in Joseph's ears as well.

Perhaps the deeper question is why Matthew included this in the story of Jesus at all; why open him and the new fledgling faith to such ridicule? Perhaps this was given to answer these critics and skeptics. Anyway, it is clear that Matthew believed this to be the way things actually happened, for he tells us flatly: "Now the birth of Jesus the Messiah took place in this way..." But, just because Matthew takes his history seriously, does this mean we should?

I think we must. For, what we are offered, even without the veneer of two-thousand years of church accretion, is the most important announcement in the history of the world. Do we need this incarnation to be true? Yes, of course we do. But does the fact we need it negate its possibility? It does not.

If there is a God at all, and if this God is benevolent (and we cannot really conceive of a God who is not), then we would expect this God to communicate with us in a way we could understand.

Now, what Matthew is telling us is that God has indeed heard our cry and has in fact spoken in a way we could understand -- for God became part of the mess, part of the human condition. In this most startling and unexpected development, God, as Emmanuel, is with us; God is pro nobis, even with all our sinfulness and self-inflicted wounds. He has not come as judge at all, but rather as Savior from our sins. I take this to mean that Christ is Savior  of the entire human race. That by his place in the world he uniquely became the one who Redeems.

What must emphatically be said is that this is our direction as well.  We, too, must now move toward the world. We who claimed to have been touched by the incarnate one must now move outward toward the surrounding brokenness just as he did. We must act with consistent compassion and haste for a world in crisis. Do you not see the importance here? Do we not hear the cries of the dying? Have we not yet heard of the cholera filled streets and the swollen bellies of children?  Or have we heard and are willing to ignore? Will we not act?

Here the indictment against us is clear and compelling. We must not let the belief that the Savior visited us from outside the world lead us to other-worldliness! This misses St. Matthew’s point entirely. It is the enfleshment of the the Savior that is paramount. It is the God who is there presenting himself as the God who is one of us, one who is drawn down into the same sweat and mire that we face.

When I think in this direction I always am reminded of Camus’s words to Christians: "I share with you the same revulsion from evil. But I do not share your hope, and I continue to struggle against this universe in which children suffer and die."  He also said: “Freedom is not made up principally of privileges; it is made up especially of duties."  Are Christians free? We say we are. Do Christians have hope? That is our chief claim. How is it then that Camus who is atheist could act and we who have the hope of hopes live as if the rest of the world does not exist?

Camus indictment is similar to Feuerbach challenge: “My only wish is…to transform friends of God into friends of man, believers into thinkers, devotees of prayer into devotees of work, candidates for the hereafter into students of the world, Christians who, by their own procession and admission, are "half animal, half angel" into persons, into whole persons.”

Would you be surprised to learn that Jesus expected nothing less! “I give you a new commandment,” he says, “that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another." (John 13:34, 35) And, just how had Jesus loved them? He washed their feet -- service. And how would Jesus love them? He would go to the cross -- sacrifice.

So Joseph did as the angel commended and he married his betrothed. He withstood all the icy looks and judgmental smirks because for him the question of Jesus' identity was settled. He raised Jesus and saw to his needs and the needs of the rest of his family. He took responsibility when responsibility wasn’t really his.


Matthew 1:18-24
18 Now the birth of Jesus the Messiah took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been engaged to Joseph, but before they lived together, she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit. 19 Her husband Joseph, being a righteous man and unwilling to expose her to public disgrace, planned to dismiss her quietly. 20 But just when he had resolved to do this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, "Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife, for the child conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 21 She will bear a son, and you are to name him Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins." 22 All this took place to fulfill what had been spoken by the Lord through the prophet: 23 "Look, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall name him Emmanuel," which means, "God is with us." 24 When Joseph awoke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him; he took her as his wife,