[The below is a reply to this article. It is a slightly edited fray reply. Joseph is not mentioned in the epistles; Mary indirectly so, if in an interesting way.]
We don't know when he died. Mary could have been cared for in various ways, including by her original family or stepchildren, particularly if Joseph died before Jesus could take care of her. And, Jesus seemed to play a large role there, given in John he has the beloved disciple take her as a surrogate mother and vice versa. The gospels overall mostly take place in Jesus' adulthood, and it is unsurprising that even if Joseph was a young man, that Mary (still likely years younger) would outlive him. Mary is rarely heard of herself.
Joseph is important even without lines since two gospels provide genealogies that go through his line. Luke does have an interesting comment (RSV) about Jesus "being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph," but still the line goes through him. He is spoke of by others as "Joseph's son" in Luke and John. Mark however calls him "Mary's son," which is interesting given he is the earliest source; Matthew cites his job but not his name. This might imply Joseph wasn't gone from the scene that long though many it is just that his name lingered. Still, Luke has Joseph around when Jesus is twelve.
Joseph plays a significant role in Matthew birth narrative, in fact, things are viewed through his perspective without any lines [reference to article] for Mary either. Matthew has Joseph the one who "called his name Jesus," recognizing his role from the start as told to him in a dream. Matthew in fact speaks of multiple such dreams. There is a tendency to combine gospel narratives, so Matthew and Luke are often combined when the narrative is told, but each gospel in fact has its own story to tell with its own special nuances. Joseph's leading role therefore is telling.
Matthew also at the very least suggests that they eventually had sex -- he "knew her not until she had borne a son."* Given what usually occurs in marriage and later reference to siblings (though some argue they are step-siblings, down to divining the meaning of the word usage), without saying anything is proven one way or the other, the average person without preconceived notions would think that implies only a small window of abstinence. The immediate concern was a virgin birth, not a life of being a virgin. That concern came later.
Luke is much more Mary focused for particular reasons, it might be supposed. Mary is told to name him Jesus. No dream is referenced to inform Joseph that all is all right. Joseph isn't instructed by God via a dream -- the trip to Bethlehem is by governmental decree and no trip to Egypt afterward is referenced. The account of him at twelve is the only reference that speaks of Joseph's thoughts directly I can see ("they did not understand") but still reference is made that suggests Mary later told the story (she kept things in her heart ... for later telling?).
Joseph is clearly a minor character but in Matthew in particular had a special role. As a whole, Jesus was recognized as "Joseph's son" and Luke has him still around when Jesus is twelve. Given that, Joseph clearly had a significant role in his upbringing and probably in the type of person he turned out to be. Clearly, for various reasons, Mary would play a bigger role, but Joseph too deserves to be somewhere in the picture. Probably (and this is not just a name thing!) a bit more than he is now.
Merry Christmas! Or something.
---
* If not, could they truly have been "married" at all?
Joseph must have been a good provider, too.
Joseph is given no lines to speak in any of the Gospel
Joseph plays a significant role in Matthew birth narrative, in fact, things are viewed through his perspective without any lines [reference to article] for Mary either. Matthew has Joseph the one who "called his name Jesus," recognizing his role from the start as told to him in a dream. Matthew in fact speaks of multiple such dreams. There is a tendency to combine gospel narratives, so Matthew and Luke are often combined when the narrative is told, but each gospel in fact has its own story to tell with its own special nuances. Joseph's leading role therefore is telling.
Matthew also at the very least suggests that they eventually had sex -- he "knew her not until she had borne a son."* Given what usually occurs in marriage and later reference to siblings (though some argue they are step-siblings, down to divining the meaning of the word usage), without saying anything is proven one way or the other, the average person without preconceived notions would think that implies only a small window of abstinence. The immediate concern was a virgin birth, not a life of being a virgin. That concern came later.
Luke is much more Mary focused for particular reasons, it might be supposed. Mary is told to name him Jesus. No dream is referenced to inform Joseph that all is all right. Joseph isn't instructed by God via a dream -- the trip to Bethlehem is by governmental decree and no trip to Egypt afterward is referenced. The account of him at twelve is the only reference that speaks of Joseph's thoughts directly I can see ("they did not understand") but still reference is made that suggests Mary later told the story (she kept things in her heart ... for later telling?).
Joseph is clearly a minor character but in Matthew in particular had a special role. As a whole, Jesus was recognized as "Joseph's son" and Luke has him still around when Jesus is twelve. Given that, Joseph clearly had a significant role in his upbringing and probably in the type of person he turned out to be. Clearly, for various reasons, Mary would play a bigger role, but Joseph too deserves to be somewhere in the picture. Probably (and this is not just a name thing!) a bit more than he is now.
Merry Christmas! Or something.
---
* If not, could they truly have been "married" at all?