What's up with the In-Laws?

The other night while reading to Katelynn her preschool Bible, we got to the story about Christmas and I was struck by something. I am still kind of amazed that I had never thought about it before and that it never occurred to me in all my years of hearing the same Christmas story. I would love any input from anyone that reads this that may know something I don't. I took a number of classes in college that had to do with Judaism, and from what I know of the culture, this just seems really odd to me.

Here's an excerpt from the Message Luke chapter 2:1-5

^1-5About that time Caesar Augustus ordered a census to be taken throughout the Empire. This was the first census when Quirinius was governor of Syria. Everyone had to travel to his own ancestral hometown to be accounted for. So Joseph went from the Galilean town of Nazareth up to Bethlehem in Judah, David's town, for the census. As a descendant of David, he had to go there. He went with Mary, his fiancée, who was pregnant.

So here's Joseph traveling to a different city simply because that's where his family is from. His fiancee (who is believed to be very young) is away from her own family, experiencing pregnancy for the first time, is unmarried and ready to have a baby any minute and there's no place for them to stay. I could understand that if they were traveling to some unfamiliar city or town...but shouldn't Joseph have family in Bethlehem? Another translation said he went there because it was the hometown of his ancestry. Weren't there ANY people in that town that were relatives that would have taken them in? I mean, really! They were planning on staying in an inn when she's about to have a baby!! From what I've studied and learned over the years, family is very important in the Jewish culture. I couldn't imagine going to a town that your family is supposed to be from and not having family to stay with. And this is assuming that Joseph was an only child and sole survivor of his family. Weren't his parents or siblings there? They'd have to be there for the census if they too were of the line of David. I know growing up my parents would open up our house to anyone passing through town. We lived along I-90 and lots of our family was from Montana, so I-90 was a common route for them. There were times people were sleeping on air mattresses on the floor because there weren't any more beds. And if they weren't home, they'd arrange for the friends/family to stay at our house anyway! But when we'd hear that family passed through and stayed at a hotel and we didn't even know it, we found it kinda odd. Just like I find it odd that Joseph hadn't arranged to stay with family....knowing his "wife" was going to have a baby any day! Maybe he was just as naive as Mary was! :)

Then it hit me. Was it because Mary was pregnant and they weren't yet married? Were they such social outcasts in their own families that even the women of the family would let (force) this presumably scared little girl go have her baby - most likely unassisted - in a cave with animals hanging around? Granted having a baby back then was a little different than it is now, but c'mon! Maybe it's just my western culture speaking here, but what a way for Mary's new in-laws to welcome her to the family!! But I guess that's how the story had to play out. If you have any insight or references to this little in-law scenario, I'd love to hear it! Thanks!

Then on a totally different side note - I love the photos that our culture has created to portray the new family. I wish I looked half that good after giving birth!! Not to mention I'm INSIDE and COMFORTABLE, PREPARED for a birth, have birth professionals around (whether at a home birth or hospital), and probably not wearing the same clothes I just traveled and/or gave birth in!! But I guess we have to leave some reality out of Christmas, don't we. It just wouldn't make the same sentiment on a Christmas card without some artistic interpretation.

Either way, Happy Birthday Jesus!!

-Tara