One of the things many Evangelicals like me found difficult is the Catholic habit of showing Jesus as a baby in the arms of Mary. "Jesus is not a baby anymore," goes the complaint. "It was a man, not a child, who died upon the Cross."
True enough. And if the baby imagery leads us to mere sentimentality about the "little Lord Jesus" and not to a mature adult relationship with Jesus, it's a bad thing. But at the same time, there is a reason Scripture itself presents us with pictures of Jesus as an infant and child. For it's "the whole Jesus" — Jesus the baby, Jesus the young boy and Jesus the man — not just Jesus on the Cross, Who is our Savior. Jesus, even as an infant, is doing the work of salvation by entering into the whole of human experience. Part of our human experience is that of infancy and childhood, so God joins himself fully with that.
That's why meditation on and even prayer to the Child Christ is alright, just as meditation and prayer to Jesus as Teacher, or Healer, or Prophet are all good, too. Christ is more than just a figure on a Cross. His revelation is bigger than a six-hour space of time on a Friday afternoon. His whole life is revelatory, including his childhood. After all, it was the child, not the man, who prompted His greatest disciple to "keep all these things in her heart" (Luke 2:51). For he was doing in his childhood what he was always doing: being about his Father's business.
Comments
Post a Comment
You can multiply examples like this where ancient Christianity again and again emphasize the full humanity of Christ against proto-heresies to the contrary and Evangelicalism (I, too, was once Evangelical) stumbles back toward heresy. I heard, a year ago or so, an Evangelical woman with a syndicated show on Christian radio, clearly describing Mary as a conduit for the deity to come to earth, and enthusing about how wonderful that made Mary. My head almost exploded. “Lady, you don’t know the half of it. She gave Him the only thing God lacked: human flesh. Without her, we have only God disguised as one of us, not God truly having become one of us, Theanthropos, which makes Mary truly Theotokos/Mother of God, whom we magnify.”
Jesus entered this world completely dependent on the creatures He had come to save. He couldn’t feed Himself, speak, walk…Every decision about what happened to Him was made by a human being. Because He allowed it to be that way.
He died the same way. Others made the decision for Him. Because He allowed it.
Isn’t that the whole ball of wax? Free will? We are allowed to do what we will when it comes to Him? It’s all up to us? Sure, He “taught” in the Temple. He is always teaching, offering Himself and His wisdom to us…but ultimately, what we DO is our own choice. Because He allows it.
Good piece Mark ... although, IMHO, very often the reason some people will react against the Rosary is not based on any real understanding but because it is Catholic & they have been ‘trained up’ to see anything Catholic as inherently wrong.
I once gave a talk to a group of elderly Protestant ladies on the Rosary (they made the mistake of asking me to speak on any topic I liked!). I told them they needed to understand what it was all about if for no other reason than to know what was going on when they went to the funerals of their Catholic neighbours (this took place in Ireland).
Well, about about an hour (of what was supposed to be a 15-20 min talk) I think they certainly had a better understanding! And while I don’t expect any of them to start praying the Rosary, I believe they were glad of the chance to find out more.
Mark, what a interesting statement you made regarding Evangelicals’ difficulty w/the Infant Jesus in His mother’s arms. I have never, in my many years of working w/infants and young children in and out of our Church, experienced those comments. For me and so many mothers and early childhood teachers that I work with, the Child and His Mother draw us in to the mystery of the man of Jesus and His teachings. The Child Jesus shows us “grown-ups” how to approach The Father. The catechism of the little ones we teach us much about the Man-Jesus who later gave His all on the Cross.
I have heard the arguments how Evangelicals claim that Jesus is no longer a baby. Similarly, they also claim that Jesus is no longer on the cross when they view the crucifix around my neck. I appreciate Mark’s message that we worship Jesus ENTIRELY….in all the phases of His life. What I don’t appreciate are the limitations my Evangelical friends put on Our Lord simply to serve their theories. Whether it Jesus as an infant or as a man dying on the cross…He is Our King of Kings…to be worshiped and glorified.
ink: What is your point? Free will can either be a blessing or a curse. God also allows salvation if you accept and obey Him or self-condemnation if you don’t. Only a consummate fool would reject Him.
When Jesus was 12, Joseph and Mary made their annual visit to the temple on the festival of the unleavened Bread. After they remained all seven days of the feast, they began their journey back to Nazareth. Since it was a custom for women and men to travel separately and either took the children, it was easy for Jesus to deliberately depart from their company to do God’s will among the poor and strangers. They did not discover his ruse for three days, and returned to Jerusalem in sorrow to hunt for him. She asked her angels to help. The angels knew that the Lord wished to furnish his mother with an occasion of merit, and that it was not yet time to reveal the secret to her. They gave her words of consolation without telling her where her Son was. Some women asked her to describe her Son. One of the women said This child came yesterday to my door to ask for alms, and I gave some to Him;and His grace and beauty ravished my hesrt. Guided by information ?Mary went to a hospital and they told her a Child of His description visited the inmates leaving some alms and speaking words of much consolation to the afflicted. Finally the angels told Mary that consolation was at hand and to go to the temple. Joseph who had separated from Mary to widen the search was also told by an angel to go to the temple where together they found Jesus.
Bob:
You are welcome to believe pious tales if you like. However, stating them as established fact, or as they they are the teaching of the Church is out of bounds. You can say, “According to so and so” and rehearse the pious tale. But Catholics are under no obligation to believe the story.
I recommend John Saward’s books “Redeemer in the Womb” and “Cradle of Redeeming Love”. The first deals with Christ’s life in the womb of Mary from a pro-life perspective, the second with his early life.
Mark, there is a big difference between pious tales and private revelation. I have never said anyone had to believe what I quote from the City of God, but approbation implies freedom from error which also seems to infer truth. I always identify my source, and I find great consolation in private revelation. I have no intention to be in conflict with you or anyone least of all with the teachings in the Deposit of
faith. They are not in conflict with private revelation, like you seem to imply. I think people that ignore private revelation miss out on a lot of interesting information. Why do you suppose God allows it if it has no purpose or meaning?
Bob:
Not true. Private revelation is not guaranteed to free of error. In her Dialogue with God the Father, St. Catherine of Siena, who is not only an approved mystic but a Doctor of the Church, says that God told her Mary was not immaculately conceived. She was a Third Order Dominican and so naturally sided with Thomas in that dispute. Private revelation is also subject to and influenced by the mental world of the mystic. Be wary of elevating private revelation to a sort of second New Testament.
You take the word of one who obviously misunderstood God to Almighty God that specified in The Mystical City of God that he intended it to be reliable truth. Approbation assures us that it contained no error. Did St Catherine’s Dialogue have an approbation? That would indeed be an anomaly.
Believing what is in your book is fine, but to say that it is necessarily true because it has been approved as not injurious to the faith is quite another story. The legenda read at meals are certainly approved as inspirational stories designed to foster growth in sanctity, but their facticity is not thereby assured.
Approbation assures us that it contained no error.
No. It doesn’t.
In the approbation of the Prince-Archbishop Franz Albert of Salzburg he quotes Cardinal D’Aguirre:who says that he considers all the studies of 50 years of his previous life as of small consequence in comparison with the doctrines he found in this book, which in all things are are in harmony with the Holy Scriptures, the Holy Fsthers and Councils of the Church. The Venerable Superior General of St. Sulpice, Abbey Emery adds:“Only since I read the revelations of Mary of Agreda do I properly know Jesus and His Holy Mother.” I will defer to their opinion if you don’t mind.
Don’t mind at all, but that hardly means tha others must or ought to.
Thank you for your response Dan: For over 30 years, I have tried to makes others aware of the existence of this greatest source of information about the Holy Family. It may be a challenge for some to read all 5700 pages of this four-volume document. I don’t remember how long it took, but it was always difficult to put down until I finished the last page. Because of it, everything I offer to God goes through Mary’s hands. There is no better human advocate.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.