Italian, english, español

 

BETWEEN LAW AND MYSTERY, GIUSEPPE'S CHRISTMAS, RIGHT MAN. AND WHY NOT “CORREDEMPTOR”?

Without Giuseppe, the Incarnation would remain a suspended event, without legal roots. Instead, for his faith and for his justice, the Word enters not only into the flesh, but in the Law, in genealogy, in the concrete history of a people. This is what makes Christmas a truly embodied event, not a simple succession of edifying images, among singing angels, an ox and a donkey reduced to spectacular surrounding heaters and shepherds who come running joyfully.

- Church news -

.

.

.

.

On the Christmas stage the scene is crowded. There is Maria, which Christian piety places at the center together with the Child, the angels singing, the shepherds who come running.

Some screenwriters he even decided to include two rudimentary ecological heating systems in the set, an ox and a donkey, depicted by iconography as creatures more faithful than men, which perhaps they really were. Obviously it is a screenplay - to use an expression borrowed from classical theatrical language - very freely inspired by the canonical Gospels, in which however there is no trace of these animal presences; if anything they can be found in some apocryphal gospel, starting from that of pseudo-Matthew.

The various screenwriters and costume designers they thus brought everything to the foreground on the set of Birthday, except he without whom, historically and concretely, Christmas would never happen: Giuseppe.

In popular devotion Giuseppe is often reduced to a marginal presence, almost decorative. Transformed in pious images into a tired old man, reassuring, harmless, as if its function was not to disturb the mystery, of having no weight, of not really counting. But this image, built to defend a truth of faith - the virginity of Mary - it ended up obscuring another, equally fundamental: his real responsibility, concrete and dramatic in the event of the Incarnation.

The Gospel of Matthew introduces it with a sober and legally dense qualification:

«Joseph her husband, that it was right and he didn't want to repudiate her, decided to fire her in secret" (Mt 1,19).

There is no insistence on generic moral qualities, nor on internal attitudes. The decisive category is justice. And justice, in the Gospel story, It's not an emotional outburst, but an operational criterion that translates into a concrete choice.

He learned of Maria's pregnancy, he finds himself faced with a situation he does not understand, but which for this very reason cannot evade and which, rather, must face with wise clarity. The Law would offer him a clear solution, publicly recognized and socially honorable: the repudiation. It is a possibility foreseen by the legal system of the time and would not entail any formal guilt (cf.. Dt 24,1-4). However, Giuseppe does not hire her, because his justice does not end in the literal observance of the norm, but it is measured in the protection of the person.

The decision to fire Maria in secret it is not a sentimental gesture nor a convenient solution. It is a deliberate act, which entails a precise personal cost: exposure to suspicion and loss of reputation. Joseph accepts this risk because his justice is not aimed at what is usually referred to as the defense of personal honor, but rather to safeguard the life and dignity of women. In this sense, he does not doubt Mary. The evangelical text does not reveal any moral suspicion towards the young bride (cf.. Mt 1,18-19). The problem is not trust, but the understanding of an event that exceeds the available categories. This places Joseph in a real state of turmoil, fully human, which however does not translate into doubt about Mary.

It is of fundamental importance to observe that this choice precedes the dream, in which the Angel of the Lord reveals to Joseph the divine origin of Mary's motherhood and invites him to welcome her with him as his bride, entrusting him with the task of naming the Child (cf.. Mt 1,20-21). The intervention of the angel does not guide Joseph's decision, but he assumes it and confirms it. Revelation does not replace human judgment, nor does it nullify it: it fits into it. God speaks to Joseph not to save him from risk, but because the risk has already been accepted in the name of justice: when his freedom is called to choose, he does not make use of the Mosaic Law to which he could legitimately appeal, but he decides to act with love and trust towards Mary, even without fully understanding the event that involves him. Only after this decision is the mystery clarified and named:

«Giuseppe, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary with you, your wife" (Mt 1,20).

Welcoming Mary as his bride, Joseph does not perform a private act: assumes public and legal responsibility, recognize as one's own the child that Mary is carrying in her womb. It is this gesture - and not an internal feeling - that introduces Jesus into the concrete history of Israel. Through Joseph, the Son legally enters the lineage of David, as attested by the Matthean genealogy that immediately precedes the story of childhood.

Giuseppe's paternity is not biological, precisely for this reason it is neither symbolic nor secondary, but real in the strictest sense of the term. It is legal paternity, historical, social. It is Joseph who gives his name to the Child, and it is precisely in imposing the name that he exercises his authority as a father. The angel's command is explicit: «You will call him Jesus» (Mt 1,21). In the biblical world, imposing the name is not a formal act, but the assumption of a permanent responsibility. With that gesture he guarantees the identity and historical position of the Son.

Without him, the Incarnation would remain a suspended event, without legal roots. Instead, for his faith and for his justice, the Word enters not only into the flesh, but in the Law, in genealogy, in the concrete history of a people. This is what makes Christmas a truly embodied event, not a simple succession of edifying images, among singing angels, an ox and a donkey reduced to spectacular surrounding heaters and shepherds who come running joyfully.

All this makes it theologically sound to state that Joseph, the man long placed in prudent - and perhaps even unjust - shadow, he is the figure through which the mystery of Christmas takes on historical and legal consistency. It is through him that the incarnate Word of God enters the Law, not to suffer it, but to accomplish it. In fact, it is no coincidence that more than thirty years later, during his preaching, Jesus affirmed with words of absolute clarity:

"You do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish, but to fulfill " (Mt 5,17).

When he then announces that this fulfillment is himself and that - as the Apostle Paul will say - the plan "to recapitulate all things in Christ is realized in Him, those in heaven and things on earth " (Ef 1,10), the shadow of the cross will already begin to be glimpsed, while they will try to stone him: «Because you, that you are a man, you make yourself God" (GV 10,33). The shadow of the cross will appear even more defined in the gesture of the High Priest who will tear his clothes hearing him proclaim himself the Son of God (cf.. Mt 26,65), plastic representation of the fact that the fulfillment of the Law now passes through refusal and sacrifice.

The Word of God becomes incarnate through Mary's yes, but this is historically guarded and protected by Joseph, the one who protected and guarded, together with his wife, the only begotten Son of God. Not in a symbolic or devotional sense, but in the concrete and real sense of history: protecting Mary, he protected the Son; protecting the Son, it has preserved the very mystery of Christmas:

«And the Word became flesh and came to live among us» (GV 1,14).

And that, without any dream theologian, the folder nesury and the Fideist neson — those, to be understood, who stamp their feet for the "Mary co-redemptrix" - has it ever occurred to them to claim, also for the Most Blessed Patriarch Joseph, the title of co-redemptor, equally due and deserved, if you really wanted to play dogmatic fantasy to the fullest, after having completely lost the daily compass, the old one and the new one.

From the island of Patmos, 24 December 2025

.

.

BETWEEN LAW AND MYSTERY: THE CHRISTMAS OF JOSEPH, A RIGHTEOUS MAN. AND WHY NOT “CO-REDEEMER”?

Without Joseph, the Incarnation would remain a suspended event, lacking juridical rootedness. Instead, through his faith and his justice, the Word enters not only into the flesh, but into the Law, into genealogy, into the concrete history of a people. This is what makes Christmas a truly incarnate event, not a mere succession of edifying images, with angels singing, an ox and a donkey reduced to scenic heating devices, and shepherds hastening joyfully to the scene.

— Ecclesial actuality—

Author
Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo.

.

On the stage of Christmas the scene is crowded. There is Mary, whom Christian piety places at the centre together with the Child; there are the angels who sing and the shepherds who hasten to the scene. Some scriptwriter has even decided to include on the set two rudimentary forms of ecological heating — an ox and a donkey — portrayed by iconography as creatures more faithful than men, which perhaps they truly were. Clearly, this is a script — to use a term borrowed from classical theatrical language — very freely inspired by the canonical Gospels, in which, however, there is no trace whatsoever of these animal presences; they can rather be found in certain apocryphal texts, beginning with the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew.

Thus, the various scriptwriters and costume designers have brought everything into the foreground on the set of the Dies Natalis, except the one without whom, historically and concretely, Christmas would never have taken place: Joseph.

In popular devotion, Joseph is often reduced to a marginal, almost decorative presence. He is transformed in pious imagery into a weary, reassuring, harmless old man, as though his role were merely not to disturb the mystery, to carry no real weight, to count for nothing. Yet this image, constructed to safeguard a truth of faith — the virginity of Mary — has ended up obscuring another truth, no less fundamental: his real, concrete and dramatic responsibility in the event of the Incarnation.

The Gospel of Matthew introduces him with a sober and juridically weighty qualification:

“Joseph, her husband, being a righteous man and unwilling to expose her to shame, decided to dismiss her quietly” (Mt 1:19).

There is no insistence on generic moral qualities, nor on interior attitudes. The decisive category is justice. And justice, in the Gospel narrative, is not an emotional impulse but an operative criterion that takes shape in a concrete decision.

Upon learning of Mary’s pregnancy, he finds himself faced with a situation he does not understand, and precisely for this reason cannot evade, but must instead confront with lucid wisdom. The Law would have offered him a clear, publicly recognised and socially honourable solution: repudiation. This was a possibility provided for by the juridical order of the time and would not have entailed any formal guilt (cf. Dt 24:1–4). Yet Joseph does not avail himself of it, because his justice is not exhausted in the literal observance of the norm, but is measured by the safeguarding of the person.

The decision to dismiss Mary quietly is neither a sentimental gesture nor a convenient compromise. It is a deliberate act that entails a precise personal cost: exposure to suspicion and the loss of reputation. Joseph accepts this risk because his justice is not directed toward what is usually described as the defence of personal honour, but toward the protection of the woman’s life and dignity. In this sense, he does not doubt Mary. The Gospel text allows no hint of moral suspicion toward the young bride (cf. Mt 1:18–19). The problem is not trust, but the understanding of an event that exceeds the available categories. This places Joseph in a condition of real, fully human turmoil, which nevertheless does not translate into doubt regarding Mary.

It is of fundamental importance to observe that this decision precedes the dream, in which the angel of the Lord reveals to Joseph the divine origin of Mary’s motherhood and invites him to take her as his wife, entrusting him with the task of imposing the name upon the Child (cf. Mt 1:20–21). The angelic intervention does not direct Joseph’s decision, but rather assumes it and confirms it. Revelation does not replace human judgment, nor does it annul it: it is grafted onto it. God speaks to Joseph not in order to spare him the risk, but because the risk has already been accepted in the name of justice: when his freedom is called to choose, he does not avail himself of the Mosaic Law to which he could legitimately have appealed, but decides to act with love and trust toward Mary, even though he does not yet fully understand the event that involves him. Only after this decision is the mystery clarified and named:

“Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife” (Mt 1:20).

By taking Mary as his wife, Joseph does not perform a private act: he assumes a public and juridical responsibility, recognising as his own the child whom Mary bears in her womb. It is this act — and not an interior sentiment — that introduces Jesus into the concrete history of Israel. Through Joseph, the Son enters legally into the line of David, as attested by the Matthean genealogy that immediately precedes the infancy narrative.

Joseph’s fatherhood is not biological; for this very reason it is neither symbolic nor secondary, but real in the strictest sense of the term. It is juridical, historical and social fatherhood. It is Joseph who gives the Child His name, and precisely in imposing the name he exercises his authority as father. The angel’s command is explicit: “You shall name Him Jesus” (Mt 1:21). In the biblical world, imposing a name is not a merely formal act, but the assumption of a permanent responsibility. Through this gesture, Joseph becomes the guarantor of the Son’s identity and historical placement.

Without him, the Incarnation would remain a suspended event, lacking juridical rootedness. Instead, through his faith and his justice, the Word enters not only into the flesh, but into the Law, into genealogy, into the concrete history of a people. This is what makes Christmas a truly incarnate event, not a mere succession of edifying images, with angels singing, an ox and a donkey reduced to scenic heating devices, and shepherds hastening joyfully to the scene.

All this renders it theologically well-founded to affirm that Joseph — long placed in prudent, and perhaps even unjust, obscurity — is the figure through whom the mystery of Christmas assumes historical and juridical consistency. It is through him that the incarnate Word of God enters the Law, not to be subjected to it, but to bring it to fulfilment. It is no coincidence that more than thirty years later, during His public ministry, Jesus declares with absolute clarity:

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfil them” (Mt 5:17).

When He will then proclaim that this fulfilment is Himself, and that — as the Apostle Paul will say — in Him the plan “to sum up all things in Christ, things in heaven and things on earth” (Eph 1:10) is realised, the shadow of the Cross will already begin to appear, as they attempt to stone Him: “Because you, being a man, make yourself God” (Jn 10:33). The shadow of the Cross will become even more defined in the gesture of the High Priest who tears his garments upon hearing Him proclaim Himself the Son of God (cf. Mt 26:65), a vivid depiction of the fact that the fulfilment of the Law now passes through rejection and sacrifice.

The Word of God becomes incarnate through Mary’s yes, but this yes is historically guarded and protected by Joseph, the one who protected and guarded, together with his spouse, the only-begotten Son of God. Not in a symbolic or devotional sense, but in the concrete and real sense of history: by protecting Mary, he protected the Son; by protecting the Son, he safeguarded the very mystery of Christmas:

“And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14).

And all this without it ever having crossed the mind of any dream-driven theologian, pietist or fideist — those, to be clear, who stamp their feet for a “Mary co-redeemer” — to claim for the Most Blessed Patriarch Joseph as well the title of co-redeemer, equally due and deserved, if one truly wished to play the game of fantasy-dogmatics to the end, after having completely lost the daily compass, both the ancient and the new.

From the Island of Patmos, 24 December 2025

.

.

JOSEPH'S CHRISTMAS, JUST MAN. AND WHY NOT “CO-REDEEMER”?

From here we have to start again: of the mystery of the Word that became flesh, animated by that spark that led first Saint Augustine and then Saint Anselm of Aosta to say, with different words but with the same substance: «I believe to understand, "I understand to believe". Only then will we truly understand the meaning of the decisive phrase: "And the Word became flesh", and, therefore, why Jesus, actually, was never born.

- Ecclesial news -

Author
Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo.

.

On the Christmas stage the scene is crowded. There is Maria, whom Christian piety places in the center next to the Child; there are the angels who sing and the shepherds who come quickly. Some scriptwriter has even decided to introduce two rudimentary ecological heating systems into the set — an ox and a donkey —, represented by iconography as creatures more faithful than men, which maybe they really were. Evidently, It is a script - to use an expression taken from classical theatrical language - very loosely inspired by the canonical Gospels., in which, however, there is no trace of these animal presences; at most they can be found in some apocryphal gospels, starting with that of Pseudo-Matthew.

Thus, the different scriptwriters and costume designers have brought to the foreground on the stage of the Birthday absolutely everything, except the one without whom, historically and concretely, Christmas would never have happened: José.

In popular devotion, José is frequently reduced to a marginal presence, decorative cases. Transformed in pious images into a tired old man, reassuring and harmless, as if its function were not to disturb the mystery, of not having weight, not really counting. but this image, built to safeguard a truth of faith — the virginity of Mary —, has ended up obscuring another, equally fundamental: your real responsibility, concrete and dramatic in the event of the Incarnation.

The Gospel of Matthew presents it with a sober and legally dense qualification:

«José, her husband, that it was fair and I didn't want to report her, "he decided to repudiate her secretly." (Mt 1,19).

There is no insistence on generic moral qualities or internal attitudes. The decisive category is justice. and justice, in the gospel story, It is not an emotional impulse, but an operational criterion that translates into a concrete decision.

Upon learning of María's pregnancy, You are faced with a situation that you do not understand, but that precisely for this reason he cannot avoid and that, on the contrary, must face with lucid wisdom. The Law would have offered a clear solution, publicly recognized and socially honorable: the repudiation. It was a possibility foreseen by the legal system of the time and would not have entailed any formal guilt. (cf. Dt 24,1-4). However, José does not accept it, because his justice is not exhausted in the literal observance of the norm, but it is measured in the protection of the person.

The decision to secretly fire María It is not a sentimental gesture nor a solution of convenience. It is a deliberate act that involves a precise personal cost: exposure to suspicion and loss of reputation. José accepts this risk because his justice is not oriented towards what is usually called the defense of personal honor., but to safeguard the life and dignity of women. In this sense, does not doubt Maria. The evangelical text does not reveal any moral suspicion regarding the young wife (cf. Mt 1,18-19). The problem is not trust, but the understanding of an event that goes beyond the available categories. This places Joseph in a condition of real confusion, fully human, which, however, does not translate into any doubt regarding Mary.

It is of fundamental importance note that this decision precedes the dream, in which the angel of the Lord reveals to Joseph the divine origin of Mary's motherhood and invites him to take her in as his wife, entrusting him with the task of imposing the name on the Child (cf. Mt 1,20-21). The angel's intervention does not guide Joseph's decision, but rather assumes and confirms it. Revelation does not replace human judgment nor nullify it: is grafted into it. God speaks to Joseph not to remove him from risk, but because the risk has already been accepted in the name of justice: when your freedom is called to choose, does not take advantage of the Mosaic Law to which it could have been legitimately appealed, but decides to act with love and trust towards Mary, even without fully understanding the event that involves it. Only after this decision is the mystery clarified and named:

«José, son of david, do not be afraid to receive Mary, your wife" (Mt 1,20).

By welcoming Mary as his wife, José does not perform a private act: assumes public and legal responsibility, recognizing as her own the son that Mary carries in her womb. It is this gesture — and not an internal feeling — that introduces Jesus into the concrete history of Israel.. Through Joseph, the Son legally enters the descendants of David, as attested by the Mattean genealogy that immediately precedes the story of childhood.

José's paternity is not biological; precisely for this reason it is neither symbolic nor secondary, but real in the strictest sense of the term. It is a legal paternity, historical and social. It is José who gives the name to the Child, and it is precisely by imposing the name that he exercises his parental authority. The angel's command is explicit: "You will name him Jesus" (Mt 1,21). In the biblical world, imposing the name is not a merely formal act, but the assumption of a permanent responsibility. With this gesture, Joseph becomes guarantor of the identity and historical location of the Son.

without him, the incarnation it would remain as a suspended event, lacking legal roots. Instead, for his faith and for his justice, the Word enters not only into the flesh, but also in the Law, in genealogy, in the concrete history of a town. This is what makes Christmas a truly incarnate event., and not a simple succession of edifying images, with angels that sing, an ox and a donkey reduced to stage heaters and shepherds who come jubilantly.

All this allows us to affirm with theological foundation that Joseph, the man for a long time placed in a prudent — and perhaps also unjust — gloom, It is the figure through which the mystery of Christmas acquires historical and legal consistency.. It is through him that the incarnate Word of God enters the Law, not to submit to it, but to fulfill it. It is no coincidence that, more than thirty years later, during his preaching, Jesus affirms with words of absolute clarity:

«Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish, but to comply" (Mt 5,17).

When will he then announce that this fulfillment is Himself and that - as the Apostle Paul will say - in Him the plan "to recapitulate in Christ all things" is carried out., those of heaven and those of earth" (Ef 1,10), the shadow of the cross will begin to be seen, while they will try to stone him: "Because you, being a man, you become God" (Jn 10,33). The shadow of the cross will appear even more defined in the gesture of the High Priest who tears his clothes upon hearing him proclaim himself the Son of God. (cf. Mt 26,65), plastic representation of the fact that compliance with the Law already involves rejection and sacrifice.

The Word of God is incarnated through Yeah of Mary, but this Yeah It is historically guarded and protected by José, the one who protected and guarded, with his wife, to the only begotten Son of God. Not in a symbolic or devotional sense, but in the concrete and real sense of history: protecting Maria, protected the son; protecting the son, guarded the very mystery of Christmas:

"And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us" (Jn 1,14).

And all this without any dream theologian, to no pietist nor to any fideist—the same, to understand each other, who tap their feet demanding a “co-redemptrix Mary” – has it ever occurred to them to also claim the title of co-redeemer for the Most Blessed Patriarch Joseph?, equally due and deserved, If you really wanted to play fanta-dogmatics to the end, after having completely lost the daily compass, the old and the new.

From the Island of Patmos, 24 December 2025

.

.

______________________

Dear Readers, this magazine requires management costs that we have always faced only with your free offers. Those who wish to support our apostolic work can send us their contribution through the convenient and safe way PayPal by clicking below:

Or if you prefer you can use our Bank account in the name of:

Editions The island of Patmos

n Agency. 59 From Rome – Vatican

Iban code: IT74R0503403259000000301118

For international bank transfers:

Codice SWIFT: BAPPIT21D21

If you make a bank transfer, send an email to the editorial staff,

the bank does not provide your email and we will not be able to send you a thank you message: isoladipatmos@gmail.com

We thank you for the support you wish to offer to our apostolic service.

The Fathers of the Island of Patmos

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.