What Really Happened that First Christmas?

by Gunther Simmermacher · December 23, 2023

The Nativity is portrayed in a traditional style at Shepherd Fields in Bethlehem, Palestine. © Günther Simmermacher

At Christmas we are reminded how there was no room at the inn and Mary had to give birth to the Messiah in a draughty stable. The real story probably was quite different from that image, as Günther Simmermacher explains.

Sorry to spoil your Nativity Play a little, but the story of Jesus’ birth in a lonely stable is at odds with the realities of the society into which the Messiah was born. Our images of the Nativity have been shaped by a European perspective, fostered in art and song and through Nativity scenes, which didn’t account for life in Palestine in the time of Jesus.

When we hear that there was no room at the inn, we have an idea of the doors of guesthouses and hostels being slammed in St Joseph’s face, forcing the Holy Family to seek out an abandoned stable in the middle of nowhere so that the Virgin Mary would have a place in which to give birth.

There are at least two problems with that image — and raising them doesn’t rewrite the Bible but actually clarifies what St Luke was trying to tell us.

The Greek word in Luke 2:7 that has been translated as “inn” is “kataluma”. It can refer to any dwelling where hospitality is offered. In our culture, a “kataluma” could be a luxury hotel or the spare room in your house in which you set up visitors.

Luke uses that term again in the Holy Week narrative to describe the Upper Room, which was a private dwelling of hospitality (22:11). However, when Luke refers to a public place of hospitality, in the parable of the Good Samaritan (10:34), he uses a different word, “pandocheion”. So when there is no place at the “kataluma”, he most likely refers to a private residence.

The importance of family

It is unthinkable that Joseph would not have received hospitality in Bethlehem, the town of his ancestors, and possibly his hometown (it may be that Joseph moved from Bethlehem to Nazareth, where Mary was at home). Indeed, it would have disgraced his relatives, even if they were distant, to shut the door on Joseph and his wife. And as a member of the House of David, Joseph would have been welcomed even by strangers.

Conversely, it would have been seen as a dishonour to Joseph had he failed to seek out his kin when he arrived in Bethlehem. Rather than having to knock on random doors, he knew exactly where he had to knock.

Yet, there was no room for Mary at the “kataluma”. Was there a breach of honour? Likely not. It may be that the guest room was already occupied, or that it was unsuitable for a mother about to give birth. So it seems quite probable that Mary was given a space in the warmest place in the house — where the animals were kept.

This may be how the European Christians arrived at the idea that Mary gave birth in a stable. In the absence of anthropological knowledge of 1st-century life in Palestine, it made sense to them that if Jesus was born in a place where animals lived — though the Bible says nothing about animals being present at the birth — and being laid in a trough (the manger), then the location must have been a stable of the kind they, the Europeans, knew.

Warm place of welcome

So the bad news is that our time-entrenched image of the Nativity is probably wrong. The good news is that Jesus’ birth actually took place in a place of warmth and welcome. Thank God for that!

So, should we throw out our Nativity scenes, rewrite our carols and tear up the Christmas homilies? Not necessarily. Even if they are historically inaccurate, the traditional image of the Nativity still has a lot to teach us about accepting into our midst the incarnated Lord — and all people in need. What is important is that our sight remains firmly fixed on the Christ-child.

Günther Simmermacher is the author of The Holy Land Trek. An updated and revised third edition of the book will be published in 2023.

Published in the December 2022 issue of The Southern Cross magazine