PDA

View Full Version : Putting Herod back into Christmas



ckerr4
12-22-2004, 03:39 PM
Putting Herod back into Christmas
by Joy Carroll Wallis
How people love Christmas carols! When I was a priest back in London, carol singing around the parish really seemed to get everyone in the mood for Christmas. We always had a real accordion and an old-fashioned lantern on a pole; we were always wrapped up warmly, and we would stop and sing carols under selected streetlights. It was a scene fit for a Christmas card.... People came out in droves, mostly non-churchgoers, to listen and put money in our collecting box for the homeless. When we were finally all sung out, we would trudge back to someone's house for mulled wine and minced pies...all very English! Great memories.


But we need to beware! Our culture loves a sentimental Christmas, and the Christmas carols that we sing are a big part of that. The words often paint an idyllic picture of sanitary bliss that has very little to do with the reality of what Jesus came into this world to do. This week Jim was reading the Christmas story to our son Luke. He read of how Mary and Joseph traveled to Bethlehem on the donkey, that there was no room in the inn. But there was a stable, and, as Jim read, "the stable was warm and clean!"


But this sanitization of the Christmas story is a relatively recent development. It's interesting that before the Victorian era, Christmas songs were much more likely to reflect the reality of Jesus' entry into our world. Carols would not hesitate to refer to the blood and sacrifice of Jesus or the story about Herod slaughtering the innocent children. As an example of the contrast, read through the words of "Away in a Manger." Jesus is the perfect baby, and "No crying he makes...." My guess is that Jesus cried a lot. We know from the gospels that the more Jesus saw of the world in which he lived, the more he mourned and wept regularly. A Jesus who doesn't weep with those who weep, a Jesus who's just a sentimental myth, may be the one that our culture prefers, but that Jesus can do nothing for us.


In Britain there's a very popular musician called Cliff Richard. About 10 years ago he released a Christmas song that reached the top 10 in the charts. The lyrics of "Saviour's Day" reflected his Christian faith and included lines such as, "Life can be yours on Saviour's Day, don't look back or turn away...." I picked up a teenage pop magazine where there was an article reviewing the season's Christmas songs. When it came to "Saviour's Day," the writer said, "This song is OK, but there's no holly, no mistletoe and wine, no presents around the tree, no snow, no Santa, in fact this song hasn't got anything to do with Christmas at all!" A radio DJ in this country once said, "What Christmas is all about is the celebration of living in a great nation like this." It's not a celebration of this "great" nation; it's about Jesus Christ. It's so easy to let the world reduce our spirituality to nostalgia and sentiment. As Evangelical Covenant Reverend Dr. Michael Van Horn said, "We must be careful not to lose the connection to the truth of the story because it is that story that shapes our identity as the people of God."


Another danger of sentimentality is that we tend to lose interest in the parts of the story that are not so comfortable. We smile at the warm cozy nativity scene, but have you ever spent a night in a barn? Or given birth in a barn? The reality is very different. Most scholars suggest that in Luke's account it's not just that the inns were full but that Mary and Joseph were forced to take the barn because their family had rejected them. Joseph has relatives or friends of relatives in Bethlehem. So rather than being received hospitably by family or friends, Joseph and Mary have been shunned. Family and neighbors are declaring their moral outrage at the fact that Joseph would show up on their doorsteps with his pregnant girlfriend.


No sooner have the wise men left the stable then King Herod plots to kill Jesus. He is so determined that he is willing to sacrifice many innocent lives in order to get to this one baby. Herod recognizes something about Jesus that in our sentiment we fail to see: that the birth of this child is a threat to his kingdom, a threat to that kind of domination and rule. Jesus challenges the very power structures of this evil age. Herod has all the male infants in Bethlehem murdered. Not so cozy. This is the Jesus who entered the bloody history of Israel, and the human race.


But we don't want to think about Herod. Van Horn calls him the "Ebenezer Scrooge without the conversion, the Grinch without a change of heart." We Christians like to talk about putting Christ back into Christmas, but let's not forget to put Herod back into Christmas.


Herod represents the dark side of the gospel. He reminds us that Jesus didn't enter a world of sparkly Christmas cards or a world of warm spiritual sentiment. Jesus enters a world of real pain, of serious dysfunction, a world of brokenness and political oppression. Jesus was born an outcast, a homeless person, a refugee, and finally he becomes a victim to the powers that be. Jesus is the perfect savior for outcasts, refugees, and nobodies. That's how the church is described in scripture time and time again - not as the best and the brightest - but those who in their weakness become a sign for the world of the wisdom and power of God.


Joy Carroll Wallis is an Anglican priest and the author of The Woman Behind the Collar (Crossroads) which tells the story of her journey to ordination and role as a consultant to the British television comedy series, The Vicar of Dibly. Joy lives in Washington, D.C., with her husband (Sojourners editor-in-chief Jim Wallis) and their two children. This message is adapted from a sermon delivered at Cedar Ridge Community Church on December 5.

http://www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=news.display_archives&mode=current_opinion&article=CO_041222_carroll_wallis

janelle
12-22-2004, 04:28 PM
Good article but I think Joseph and Mary were married by the time Jesus was born.

This is what Mel Gibson was criticised about in the "Passion of the Christ". He didn't sanitize it and lots of people were turned off saying it was just a slasher movie. You think crucifixions were pretty sights? Duh. No, we want the Easter Bunny right there with Jesus's suffering. We want the baby in a nice cozy crib instead of a smelly barn in a feeding trough.

flute
12-23-2004, 06:46 AM
*laughing* at the warm & cozy bunny part.

Very good article.

donnakc
12-23-2004, 06:50 AM
Good article but I think Joseph and Mary were married by the time Jesus was born.

This is what Mel Gibson was criticised about in the "Passion of the Christ". He didn't sanitize it and lots of people were turned off saying it was just a slasher movie. You think crucifixions were pretty sights? Duh. No, we want the Easter Bunny right there with Jesus's suffering. We want the baby in a nice cozy crib instead of a smelly barn in a feeding trough.

It says Mary was Joseph's bethrothed. I think that means they weren't married yet, doesn't it?

Zoobee
12-23-2004, 09:28 AM
I thought bethrothed meant engaged. So maybe not.

Also I have heard something regarding the original translation that goes like this:

The scripture in ancient Hebrew wrote that Mary was a maiden. However, in Hebrew that does not necessarily mean Virgin. It just means young girl. When that was translated into the Greek, maiden did mean virgin, so it became virgin. When King James translated it into English, he had used the Greek version so Mary became a virgin. The truth is, that the scripture in ancient Hebrew did not necessarily imply that Mary HAD to be a virgin, which calls into question if she was or not. (Judging by her age and circumstance, she most likely was, even though the scripture does not directly say it. I just thought that was an interesting little tidbit.)

janelle
12-23-2004, 11:59 AM
Our church believes Mary was EVER virgin even after Jesus's birth. If not then Jesus's divinity comes into question. Yes, that means she and Joseph never "did it" or had any other children. Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit not a human by human means. How hard is it to believe that God did this when he also created Adam?

But then we know of people right now who "never do it" after the birth of a child. Elvis Presley comes to mind. I know that was disfunctional but Jesus's family was a special family---He was God. Not really wanting to make light of this so will stop right here. LOL

Zoobee
12-23-2004, 02:56 PM
Correct me please if I am wrong, but I could have sworn that Timothy, who wrote a book in the Bible, was Jesus' brother (technically half-brother, I guess).

I dont see how Mary remaining a virgin after Jesus' birth brings Jesus' divinity into question. Jesus was conceived by a virgin. Like WOW. What else do you really need? Anyway, even though Jesus was the Son of God, he still had to be fully human or else his temptation by Satan would have meant NOTHING. The fact that Satan could even attempt to tempt Jesus would have to mean that Jesus was fully human and therefore suseptible to temptation, otherwise why bother.

Mary having sex with Joseph after Jesus' birth only makes her more human. She was not divine, Jesus was. Besides, the angels instructions to Joseph upon coming to him and telling him to still take her as his wife only stated that he could not know her (meaning sex) while she was pregnant, and then he was to know her fully.

janelle
12-23-2004, 07:52 PM
I'm not sure about that but that is what my church believes. I know the answer is on one of it's web sites. Jesus's divinity is very important and I think somewhere there is a scripture about Mary being ever virgin.

Anyway to be silly, just who would want to be Jesus's sibling?? Talk about sibling rivalry. LOL

Also, it's very hard in the bible to know just who were brothers since cousins were referred to as ones brother. And Jesus did tell John from the cross to take Mary in as his mother. In the Jewish culture a widow without children needed to be cared for by a male protector. If Mary had another son Jesus wouldn't need to tell him to take Mary into his home. He would already know to do it.

Zoobee
12-26-2004, 08:51 PM
That kind of brings up the question.. where was Joseph in all this? I may be wrong, but I dont remember reference to him dying. He leave bc he wasnt getting any?

There are also lots of the Bible missing. I heard reference to an interesting story about Jesus as a child. He was playing with another boy and had a dispute, and he stood up and said "Die!", and the child died. Joseph ran out and told him that he cant do that, it isnt right. So Jesus said "OK, Live again!" and the other boy stood up and walked home.

HA - imagine having to scold the Son of God. I'll pass.

Anyways, I just dont see how Mary being human and having sex with her husband takes away from Jesus' divinity. The point was for Jesus to be human, therefore I do not see how his mother acting human does anything more than make Jesus himself more real, which was the point in coming to Earth as a human anyways.

janelle
12-27-2004, 08:37 PM
I guess if all of Jesus's life was told then the bible it would be so long the most important parts would not be given the importance they deserve.

We don't kow much about Jesus's childhood. I was taught that Joseph died before Jesus's ministry began. Nothing much said after Joseph led his family out of danger. Jesus learned to be a carpenter from Joseph I'm sure.

The story you told is really silly. Never heard of it. Sounds like something someone would make up.

As far as Joseph and Mary not having sex. Why are we so absorbed by sex now? As a culture we are immersed in it. Maybe to them in those days raising the SON OF GOD was more important than getting it on. Geesh. LOL

Wispy
12-27-2004, 08:57 PM
I thought bethrothed meant engaged. So maybe not.

Also I have heard something regarding the original translation that goes like this:

The scripture in ancient Hebrew wrote that Mary was a maiden. However, in Hebrew that does not necessarily mean Virgin. It just means young girl. When that was translated into the Greek, maiden did mean virgin, so it became virgin. When King James translated it into English, he had used the Greek version so Mary became a virgin. The truth is, that the scripture in ancient Hebrew did not necessarily imply that Mary HAD to be a virgin, which calls into question if she was or not. (Judging by her age and circumstance, she most likely was, even though the scripture does not directly say it. I just thought that was an interesting little tidbit.)

Luke 1:26-31 reports that it was to “a virgin” whose name was Mary that the angel Gabriel carried the news: “You are to conceive and bear a son, and you must name him Jesus.” At this, verse 34 states, “Mary said to the angel, ‘But how can this come about, since I am a virgin [“I do not know man: i.e., as husband,” “I am having no intercourse with a man,”?’”

Wispy
12-27-2004, 08:59 PM
Good article but I think Joseph and Mary were married by the time Jesus was born.

This is what Mel Gibson was criticised about in the "Passion of the Christ". He didn't sanitize it and lots of people were turned off saying it was just a slasher movie. You think crucifixions were pretty sights? Duh. No, we want the Easter Bunny right there with Jesus's suffering. We want the baby in a nice cozy crib instead of a smelly barn in a feeding trough.

Matthew 1:22-25 “Now all this took place to fulfill the words spoken by the Lord through the prophet: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son and they will call him Immanuel, a name which means ‘God-is-with-us’. When Joseph woke up he did what the angel of the Lord had told him to do: he took his wife to his home and, though he had not had intercourse with her, she gave birth to a son; and he named him Jesus.”

Wispy
12-27-2004, 09:09 PM
I'm not sure about that but that is what my church believes. I know the answer is on one of it's web sites. Jesus's divinity is very important and I think somewhere there is a scripture about Mary being ever virgin.

Anyway to be silly, just who would want to be Jesus's sibling?? Talk about sibling rivalry. LOL

Also, it's very hard in the bible to know just who were brothers since cousins were referred to as ones brother. And Jesus did tell John from the cross to take Mary in as his mother. In the Jewish culture a widow without children needed to be cared for by a male protector. If Mary had another son Jesus wouldn't need to tell him to take Mary into his home. He would already know to do it.


Matt. 13:53-56, “When Jesus had finished these parables he left the district; and, coming to his home town, he taught the people in their synagogue in such a way that they were astonished and said, ‘Where did the man get this wisdom and these miraculous powers? This is the carpenter’s son, surely? Is not his mother the woman called Mary, and his brothers [Greek, a·del·phoi´] James and Joseph and Simon and Jude? His sisters [Greek, a·del·phai´], too, are they not all here with us?’” (On the basis of this text, would you conclude that Jesus was Mary’s only child or that she had other sons as well as daughters?)

The New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967, Vol. IX, p. 337) admits regarding the Greek words a·del·phoi´ and a·del·phai´, used at Matthew 13:55, 56, that these “have the meaning of full blood brother and sister in the Greek-speaking world of the Evangelist’s time and would naturally be taken by his Greek reader in this sense. Toward the end of the 4th century (c. 380) Helvidius in a work now lost pressed this fact in order to attribute to Mary other children besides Jesus so as to make her a model for mothers of larger families. St. Jerome, motivated by the Church’s traditional faith in Mary’s perpetual virginity, wrote a tract against Helvidius (A.D. 383) in which he developed an explanation . . . that is still in vogue among Catholic scholars.”

Mark 3:31-35, “His mother and brothers now arrived and, standing outside, sent in a message asking for him. A crowd was sitting round him at the time the message was passed to him, ‘Your mother and brothers and sisters are outside asking for you’. He replied, ‘Who are my mother and my brothers?’ And looking round at those sitting in a circle about him, he said, ‘Here are my mother and my brothers. Anyone who does the will of God, that person is my brother and sister and mother.’” (Here a clear distinction is drawn between Jesus’ natural brothers and his spiritual brothers, his disciples. No one claims that the reference to Jesus’ mother means anything different from what it says. Is it consistent, then, to reason that his natural brothers were not that but were perhaps cousins? When what is meant is not brothers but relatives, a different Greek word [syg·ge·non´] is used, as at Luke 21:16.)

Jolie Rouge
12-27-2004, 09:28 PM
I guess if all of Jesus's life was told then the bible it would be so long the most important parts would not be given the importance they deserve.

We don't kow much about Jesus's childhood. I was taught that Joseph died before Jesus's ministry began. Nothing much said after Joseph led his family out of danger. Jesus learned to be a carpenter from Joseph I'm sure.

The last we read of Joseph was when Jesus was twelve and they lost him on the trip home. They realised that he was missing and returned to search for him, finding him in the Temple with the Elders. When admonished Jesus told them "I must be about my Father's work". They returned home and that is the last reference I recall of Joseph. When Jesus is escorting Mary at the Wedding in Cannan, there is no mention of Joseph which is unusual. A woman had to be attended by a man, since it is Jesus the assumption is that Joseph has died in the intervening years.



The story you told is really silly. Never heard of it. Sounds like something someone would make up.

Never heard of this on myself ...

Zoobee
12-28-2004, 07:53 AM
I guess if all of Jesus's life was told then the bible it would be so long the most important parts would not be given the importance they deserve.

We don't kow much about Jesus's childhood. I was taught that Joseph died before Jesus's ministry began. Nothing much said after Joseph led his family out of danger. Jesus learned to be a carpenter from Joseph I'm sure.

The story you told is really silly. Never heard of it. Sounds like something someone would make up.

As far as Joseph and Mary not having sex. Why are we so absorbed by sex now? As a culture we are immersed in it. Maybe to them in those days raising the SON OF GOD was more important than getting it on. Geesh. LOL

Yes, well, I have friends that have access to other information and sources that are not in the current Bible. And one of them told me that. I thought it was cute, and very possible, whether or not it was entirely accurate is yet to be determined. But you have to figure that Jesus did in fact have a childhood, and still had the powers of the Son of God, and figure he wasnt told his destiny until he was 12.... so it follows that something like that could have very possibly happened. Kid has to learn too.

I was not trying to focus on "getting it on" either. I was trying to make the point that making Mary more human does not detract from Jesus' divinity.

And maybe I want to know more. Maybe I dont like the idea of someone else deciding for me what the important parts of the Bible are. To me, every aspect of someone's past leads to their future, therefore, the aspects of Jesus' life all are important, in some respect or the other. JMO.


The last we read of Joseph was when Jesus was twelve and they lost him on the trip home. They realised that he was missing and returned to search for him, finding him in the Temple with the Elders. When admonished Jesus told them "I must be about my Father's work". They returned home and that is the last reference I recall of Joseph. When Jesus is escorting Mary at the Wedding in Cannan, there is no mention of Joseph which is unusual. A woman had to be attended by a man, since it is Jesus the assumption is that Joseph has died in the intervening years.

that makes sense.



Luke 1:26-31 reports that it was to “a virgin” whose name was Mary that the angel Gabriel carried the news: “You are to conceive and bear a son, and you must name him Jesus.” At this, verse 34 states, “Mary said to the angel, ‘But how can this come about, since I am a virgin [“I do not know man: i.e., as husband,” “I am having no intercourse with a man,”?’”

I wasnt saying that Mary was not a virgin when she conceived Jesus. Im saying that the languistic part of it is interesting.



The New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967, Vol. IX, p. 337) admits regarding the Greek words a·del·phoi´ and a·del·phai´, used at Matthew 13:55, 56, that these “have the meaning of full blood brother and sister in the Greek-speaking world of the Evangelist’s time and would naturally be taken by his Greek reader in this sense. Toward the end of the 4th century (c. 380) Helvidius in a work now lost pressed this fact in order to attribute to Mary other children besides Jesus so as to make her a model for mothers of larger families. St. Jerome, motivated by the Church’s traditional faith in Mary’s perpetual virginity, wrote a tract against Helvidius (A.D. 383) in which he developed an explanation . . . that is still in vogue among Catholic scholars.”

Cool... :cool: