I’ve been busy much of this week preparing a sermon that I gave at church earlier today, Father’s Day, my first full sermon ever. The purpose was to affirming the necessity of fathers in our 21st century post-modern America, not through a jeremiad against contemporary trends, but rather presenting a role model for fathers who want to make a difference.

Fathers: who needs them?

Throughout most of human history, such a question would have been considered nonsensical.

But, in today’s affluent societies of Europe and North America, and increasingly in Asia, this question is now deadly serious, as the traditional structures of clan and family, along with established roles of men and women, have steadily loosened in consequence of extensive urbanization and increased mobility, along with a reduced threat of visitations from the four Horsemen of the Apocalypse: war, pestilence, famine, and early death.

We have first witnessed a winnowing down of blood relationships to the primacy of the so-called “nuclear family” – and now we see an explosion of various alternative structures claiming entitlement to the title of family. We various combinations involving single parents or two adults – married or not, same or different sexes. We have proliferating familial permutations through divorce or break-up of one pair and the forming of new pairs – leading to the rise of so-called “blended families”. Nor are we restricted to pairs: we also are seeing in certain subcultures the rise of de facto polygamy where one male fathers children with multiple women, usually without marrying any of them – and women whose children have different fathers.

In parallel with this proliferation of family structures, we have seen a loosening of economic strictures that in the past have often prevented women from living on their own without a husband or else forced them to struggle in penury and/or rely on charity to survive. Coupled with the economic shift has also been the rise of philosophical feminism, which has provided a foundation for women to view themselves as persons in their own right rather defining themselves in terms of their relationship to the males of the species.

And now with advances in medical technology, even that immutable biological necessity of sexual intercourse that brings one man and one women into intimate relationship, even if only fleetingly -has been shattered. We have entered that brave new world of anonymous sperm donors and test-tube fertilization that has enabled pregnancy and motherhood without the need for a male person to be around, just male genetic material. Indeed, with surrogate motherhood, one can even bypass the nine-month mystery of pregnancy that has created that age-old mystic bonding between mother and child. Indeed, some of these births raise the question as to who should be called the mother and the father out of as many as five possible claimants.

Fathers: who needs them?

Certainly, many in our society don’t believe that fathers are needed. An article published yesterday in the Wall Street Journal noted that the 38% of babies in the U.S. are born out-of-wedlock. Within the black community, that percentage is 71%, nearly three-quarters of births. As for families without any male in their homes, the percentages range from 22% of white children to 56% of black children.

Indeed, fatherhood is under assault today. We also see a counter-reaction underway, as this article notes, as we increasingly see the bitter fruit that has resulted from the absence of fathers.

Nonetheless, we cannot and will not as a society return to traditional forms. That genie has left the bottle. And indeed, much good has arisen from these changes, in particular the unleashing of the potentiality of women.

But the question still remains, does Christianity, formed as it was in a different era of relationships between men and women, have something to address to us men in the 21st century? Does the Bible have wisdom to impart? Fortunately, the answer is yes.

Fathers: who needs them?

The good news for us fathers is that we do have a Biblical model, a man who faces a situation that echoes with what many of us fathers face today.

I’m speaking of Joseph, the husband of Mary, the mother of Jesus. Now in terms of space, Joseph occupies very few verses of Scripture. None of Joseph’s words have been recorded. Indeed, after his cameo appearances in Matthew’s and Luke’s birth narratives of Jesus, his only other appearance in the life of Jesus is in Luke’s narrative regarding the events surrounding a family trip to Jerusalem when Jesus was 12 years old.

In one of those honest-to-life anecdotes that helps establish the Bible’s “ring of truth, Luke relates how Jesus was left behind in Jerusalem due to one of those comic (in retrospect) breakdowns in family communications that happens now and again, as anyone who has been a parent can attest to. Starting at Luke 2, verse 42, we read:

When [Jesus] was twelve years old, they went up to the Feast according to the custom. After the Feast was over, while his parents were returning home, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, but they were unaware of it. Thinking he was in their company, they traveled on for a day. Then they began looking for him among their relatives and friends. When they did not find him, they went back to Jerusalem to look for him.

Or, if we want have to have a little fun with pronouns, we could sum up the scene as follow: Everyone thought that Jesus was with Someone Else. Jesus could have been with Anyone, but in fact, Nobody had taken him along.

Sound familiar?

In any case, Mary and Joseph spent three more days looking for Jesus until they found him in the temple courts. Curiously, it is Mary who speaks, not her husband; indeed it almost appears that Joseph is on the scene for the sole purpose of being the straight man in a play on words.

Mary: Son, why have you treated us like this? Your father and I have been anxiously searching for you.

Jesus: Why were you searching for me? Didn’t you know I had to be in my Father’s house?

* * * * * *

Besides this appearance in Jesus’ life at age twelve, we know that Joseph was around long enough to teach Jesus the carpentry trade. However, once the Biblical narrative picks up again at the start of Jesus’ ministry about 18 years later, Joseph is noticeably absent from the remainder of the story, probably because he had died in the interim, although the Bible does not explicitly state this.

Thus if we were to measure importance in terms of Scriptural citation, Joseph would represent a rather minor character. Indeed, since Mary alone of all mothers became pregnant without the assistance of a man and gave birth while still a virgin, from the biological viewpoint, Jesus alone of all men had no human father. Yet God, in his wisdom, provided Mary with a human father for her son.

Fathers: who needs them?

We see that God considered that fathers are needed since he provided Jesus with an earthly father. Thus, let us examine this famous nativity passage from Matthew, looking to see if we can discern some of the character traits that commend Joseph as a worthy father.

Turning to Matthew 1, verse 18:

This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about. His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit.

This verse sets the scene. We start with a statement of a legal relationship between Mary and Joseph: they were an engaged couple, or to use another term, betrothed. Up to fairly recently, in our society, engagement was a legal commitment, and breach of this commitment was a prosecutable offense, unlike today, where engagement is only a mutual intention to marry in the future, not legally binding.

To understand this passage more fully, let me give a brief overview of Jewish marriage traditions during the time of Jesus, which I will base primarily on a lecture by Darrell Johnson some years back.

Jewish 1st century marriage was a three-stage process.

First was the betrothal ceremony, which somewhat corresponds to proposing marriage in our marriage schema today. However, rather than being a one-on-one private event, betrothal was a public ceremony establishing a covenant, during which time the families settled on the purchase price, the payment of which technically established marriage. The betrothal was sealed with vows and the bride’s drinking of a cup of wine that the groom has offered her.

The second stage was what we today would call the engagement period. In the first century, this period was a time when the couple were separated from each other, a period which could last as long as a year, during which time the bride prepared herself for marriage, while the groom prepared a wedding chamber for the two of them in his father’s house. During this time, the bride would wear a veil when she went out to indicate here betrothed status. The bride would expectantly await the return of her groom, which could come at any time.

The third stage, the actual wedding, is immediately preceded by the bridegroom’s festively arriving unannounced at the bride’s residence with his friends, usually around midnight. The bride joins them to begin the ceremony. The groom takes his bride and they all travel to his father’s house, to the wedding chamber, where the two consummate their marriage. The two then leave the wedding chamber together, with the bride now unveiled, to ratify their married status and initiate the wedding feast.

As you’ve listened to this outline, you might have thought of certain events in the life of Jesus and certain parables of his in which Jesus uses these wedding customs as an analogy for His relationship with the Church, whom is called the Bride of Christ. For instance, in John 14:1-3, Jesus uses the language of betrothal. It is also quite significant that in John, the ministry of Jesus begins at a wedding feast. Indeed, a study of the many references to marriage customs in the Gospels would take at least a whole sermon in itself. I don’t plan to do that now, you will be pleased to know.

Thus returning to Matthew 1:18, we read that Mary had been betrothed to Joseph. At some point during the subsequent separation period, Mary’s pregnancy became know to Joseph. The text is not entirely clear as to the time point: this discovery might occurred during the waiting period, but Joseph might not have learned of her pregnancy until he had come back to take her to the wedding chamber – or possible even not until the two of them were alone in the wedding chamber. All the text makes certain is that this discovery occurred before they had intercourse.

This discovery, in turn, initiated a crisis. In accord with the received knowledge of the ways of women and men since the beginning of all things, Joseph had prima facie evidence that Mary had had intercourse with another man, and even worse, that she was carrying that man’s child. Mary, in turn, knew that she was still a virgin and had remained faithful to Joseph, but had no way to corroborate her innocence.

Fathers: who needs them?

The rest of the passage deals with the unexpected resolution of this crisis. But before we go on to verse 19, I would first relate the tale of a similar episode between a groom and his bride on their wedding night, one occurring in modern times, indeed, in France in 2006. [Source 1; Source 2]

Two French Muslims were married a traditional wedding ceremony. They retired to the bedchamber to consummate their marriage, but after intercourse the groom, an engineer in his 30’s went down to the wedding party and publicly denounced his bride to the assembled family members and guests, stating that he was unable to produce the traditional blood-stained sheet and accusing her of having lied about being a virgin. That night she was delivered to her parent’s doorstep.

The next morning, the groom went to court to request a marriage annulment on the grounds that his bride had deceived him on “one of the essential elements” of the marriage. The woman did not oppose annulment, acknowledging that she had led her groom to believe that she was a virgin when she had already had sexual intercourse. The court ruling did not mention religion, but rather cited breach of contract as grounds for granting the annulment, as he had married her only after she had presented herself to him as single and chaste, in the words of the court.

When this decision became public knowledge just a couple of weeks ago, it set off a nationwide political firestorm in this officially secular nation, with widespread denunciations of this decision, along with calls for changing the law and even calls for the Justice Minister to resign.

I am mentioning this case not for the purpose of discussing the legalities of the case or the public outcry, but rather to highlight the groom’s behavior when he found out that his wife was not a virgin, having been led to believe that she was. He chose to create a public row, humiliating her and the members of both families, followed by taking the necessary steps to legally end the marriage.

Incidentally, the groom’s behavior was condemned by fellow religionists, including the vice president of the local Islamic center at which the wedding took place, who was quoted as saying, “This man is the biggest of all the donkeys…” (I suspect the original French has been a bit sanitized here for a family audience.) “Even if the woman was not longer a virgin, he had no right to expose her honor.”

I think this donkey of a groom would have been well served had he read the Book, the title that Muslims give to the Bible, and in particularly this story of Joseph.

Fathers: who needs them?

Let us return now to Matthew 1, verse 19, to pick up our story, looking at how Joseph handled his situation with his pregnant bride, Mary.

Because Joseph her husband was a righteous man and did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly.

Here we now start to see Joseph’s character. He had a choice here: he could have let anger rule; he could have been a “donkey” and publicly exposed Mary to disgrace, as he had incontrovertible evidence to justify a claim of unfaithfulness. But instead, he chose to act in accord with the way of righteousness, disciplining his heart and to exhibit a face of kindness and mercy to Mary. The Bible doesn’t get into a psychological analysis of Joseph’s feelings and motives, but through his actions, Joseph reflects here the character of His (and our) Heavenly Father.

On the other hand, let us note that while Joseph is showing himself a righteous man here, he did not rise yet to extraordinary action. He exhibited mercy, but his mercy did not encompass an intention of forgiveness such that he would have been willing to remain married to Mary. Justice still held the upper hand over reconciliation.

Thus, at this point, we have a poignant narrative, but still one which has been repeated many times before and since in the history of humanity. However, at this point the story takes a dramatic turn. Verse 20…

But after he had considered this, the angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.

Well certainly, the Lord could have chosen to not intervene and let the drama run its natural course. In that case, the nativity would likely involve the elevation of Mary to a virgin priestess giving birth to a man-god who grew up without a father as a mighty spiritual being – a story far closer to pagan mythology than a rendition of the Incarnation.

But as Hebrews 2:17-18 observes,

For this reason, [Jesus] had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.

And thus God fully understood that in order for Jesus to be both fully God and fully man, Jesus had to grow up not as an exalted avatar, but rather within an ordinary family as an ordinary man, subject to the discipline – and the love and direction – of an earthly father. In his human nature, Jesus needed the presence and guidance of a human father, along with his mother, to shape his character so that he could grow up into the fullness of perfect manhood.

* * * * * *

Again, according to verse 20, God intervened and spoke to Joseph in a dream. We don’t know exactly how much detail God went into with Joseph, or how much of God’s message Joseph was able to understand. What we do know is that when God calls people to obedience and service, he rarely explains the whole picture – but he does explain what we need to know. And as we learn from the text, what Joseph clearly knew was that Mary’s pregnancy was blessed and approved by God, that the child was a boy and had a special calling to save the people, and that Joseph was not to fear taking Mary as his wife.

“Not to fear taking Mary as his wife”…yes indeed, God’s call to Joseph entailed a cost of discipleship. And the cost here was the cost to Joseph’s reputation that would result from his marrying Mary. After all, people in the 1st century were just as able as people today to count weeks and months and it would quickly be public knowledge that Jesus was born in wedlock, but, as the saying goes, not quite far enough in wedlock.

At best, Joseph would be viewed as one who had “jumped the gun” (or the 1st century equivalent thereof), a man who could not control his passions, a man who could not be fully trusted. At worse, Jesus would be treated as a bastard, Mary despised as a whore, and Joseph would be held in ridicule as a cuckold. And indeed, over the centuries, even to the present day, various opponents of Jesus have denigrated him as having dubious parentage.

But in the end, as verse 24 observes,

When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife.

Obedience won out over fear and pride, and as his reward, Joseph had the privilege of being a father to Jesus.

Verse 25…

But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

With the dramatic tension now resolved, we may be tempted to hurriedly skip over this first sentence, pausing only perhaps to observe Matthew’s verification of the truth of the message of Joseph’s dream in verse 21, that Mary’s child would be a son.

That would be a grave error, as this sentence gives a unique glimpse into the life of Mary and Joseph together as husband and wife. As such it is the keystone of the narrative, because it demonstrates the ultimate expression of Joseph’s character and the transformation that God had worked in Joseph’s heart.

In particular, that extraordinary step which Joseph could not countenance in verse 19, we now see that he has taken here – the step of full reconciliation in marriage.

But he had no union with her…

We do not see here the angry, unreconciled spouse here, the fruit of a grudging, acquiescence to a divine command. We do not see a man entering marriage for the purpose of abusing his vulnerable, pregnant wife for bearing a child that was not his. Rather, Matthew pulls up the bedroom curtain to assure us that in respect for that unique gift that Mary had received from God, Joseph protected and nourished his new bride by restraining his passion in order to protect her and the baby from possible injury.

until she gave birth…

I recognize that I am entering into the realm of historical controversy within the church, but as I follow along this tale to its end, its narrative flow and spiritual integrity must lead to Joseph and Mary’s marriage having been consummated sometime after she gave birth. I mean, if God called Joseph to be a father to Jesus, to provide Jesus with a human family to grow up in as he was being perfected in his human nature, then it violates the whole direction of this narrative for Jesus to have grown up observing a sham marriage, one in which his father withheld the physical validation of reconciliation to his mother. Alternatively, it would violate the flow of narrative for Jesus to have grown up with an untouchably exalted mother who would thereby have essentially been the object of worship by his earthly father.

To me, the legacy of this story of Mary and Joseph is the earthly ordinariness within which the extraordinary occurs. The miracle of the Incarnation is that our Lord came into history and grew up to manhood without disruption to outward forms of daily living. Rather, by full living within and through these ordinary forms of living, Jesus redeemed the entirety of human existence and human history. In an almost paradoxical sense, it was the very ordinariness of Jesus’ life up to the time he began his ministry that defines the extraordinariness of Jesus’ very being.

And part of that respect for the ordinary forms of daily living would involve Jesus being raised in an household of parents living out in their daily life the covenant of marriage in its fullness, physically as well as spiritually. Indeed, if we take certain other Scripture verses literally, Jesus wasn’t even an only child, but grew up the eldest son to a number of brothers and sisters, with all the adjustments and character development that such would entail.

Out of a quintessentially ordinary family cocoon came forth into the world the extraordinary and unique butterfly that was Jesus.

* * * * * * * * * *

Fathers: who needs them?

Thus what does this narrative teach us about fatherhood in our 21st century Western society.

First, we find God affirming, that sperm donation does not equal fatherhood. While the links of biology and genetics form powerful bonds between father and mother and child, fatherhood encompasses far more, as its deepest roots lie in the core of our character and the fatherly virtues that we express in our lives. This is good news for those increasing numbers of men, myself included, who are called upon to be fathers to children who are not their biological offspring.

Second, we see that our fatherhood finds expression at least as much in the way we treat our spouses, the mothers of our children, as it finds expression in the way we treat our children. Indeed the way we treat our spouses sends a powerful message to our children about the nature of fatherhood.

Thirds, this story fleshes out kindness, mercy, obedience overcoming fear and pride, and a reconciling spirit as core essentials of fatherhood, as these are the character traits that Joseph exhibits in this story.

Fathers: who needs them?

Well, if God demonstrated to us that Jesus needed an earthly father – then certainly a world of imperfect sinners, which includes all of us here, needs fathers too.

©2008, all rights reserved