Coming Back To Our Common Home And Original Innocence Christmas Crib Part - III

Towards an Ecological Conversion

THIRD PART

3. New Paradise: Bethlehem.

We are trying to aim now to nativity of Jesus. So our eyes have to gaze to so-called “Infancy Narrative”, which are located in Matthew’s (Mt 1-2)[1] and Luke’s (Lk 1-3) gospels. The exegetes tell us that Mt and Lk had the same source coming from Mark about passion, death and resurrection of Christ (Kerigma)[2], but the infancy narrative have unfolded each one independently as introduction to the main themes in their written, although there are some coincidence elements among them about (Spong 1992, pp.36-39). However, Matthew’s written is catechetical style but Luck meditative style; Mt tries cover the basic areas of the christian message: genealogy, role of Joseph, conversion of gentiles (Magi), Exodus motif (Egypt), victory through sorrow and death and full consecration to God; Lk stresses the Jewish background of Jesus, the role of Mary, universality of the salvation especially of the lowest, prophetic identity of Jesus (cf. Stuhlmueller 1961, p.120). According Spong[3] these infancy narrations are a kind of midrash (no literal history or biography), which means the unique historically certain is the born of Jesus from a woman (Ga 4:4-5) as any person[4], and all other elements are author’s narrative elaborations to explain people second generation, because the first generation tried to announce the scandal of the cross than scandal of the crib.

As a good writer Luke situates the Jesus’ birth narration in a very concrete time, space and socio-cultural parameters: time of Caesar Augustus and Quirinus was governor of Syria, space in a small town Bethlehem near to Jerusalem, Judea province, and genealogical line of king David (cf. Spong, 1992, p.91). Nevertheless, the time and space given by Lk, among specialists are still in discussion because there is a historical contradiction problem, much more we can not take any biblical narration literally other wise the nativity narration may be destroyed[5]. Both Mt and Lk place the Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem, which coming from Hebrew ‫בֵּית לֶחֶם Bet Lehem “House of bread”; ancient Greek: Βηθλεέμ, the modern name of Beit-Lahm “house of flesh”. Beyond any timing and settling place complications, the mot important thing for the author is the meaning of the location; according R. Brown (pp.420-431) behind of the importance of the place is Mi 4-5, where has to born the new ruler of the country. Moreover, in Bethlehem the manger, small town and unsuspected corner dawned out the greatness of God (vv 4-5).

In the socio-politic-religious sense, who has to play no a meaningless role was a simple woman Mary (Myriam). A woman being spinster was meaningless for Jewish society, so again, the God’s unmeasured love meets woman’s powerlessness. This kind of reunification of opposite poles are so often in Luke’s gospel. The child Jesus, in the place where shepherd David was anointed by Samuel (X century BC), born as new anointed by Holy Spirit to proclaim God’s Kingdom and challenges the Caesar Augustus’ imperial power (cf. Johnson 2011).

The manger new Eden. As we can imagine the crib as a head lie down of domestic animals. Such a simple and unclean place, but peaceful where there is more biodiversity presence. In our ecological reading of the Gospel, we dare to say that this humble crib becomes in new Eden, the paradise of the integrity. In the Luke midrashic elaboration about manger the background are Jr 14:18 where God visiting his people remind in manger as a traveler, and Is 1:3 the animals recognize their owner (cf. Spong 1992, p.91). As it is well known that the traditional theology of the Christian church used to compare Eve with new Eve-Mary, the former Adam with new Adam-Jesus[6]. At the same time we can say, this is somehow where the prophetic dream Is 11:1-9 becoming reality, notwithstanding yet we find any sort of biblical explanation that points out some relation between this prophetic dream and the Jesus’ birth narration in the manger. Let us enjoy some wonderful and ecological clues that are possible come out from:

*        Little baby in the midst of the (domestic) animals, who in his own time was driven by Spirit and join with wild beasts in the wilderness for forty days (Mk 1:12-13)[7]. Number forty (days, years) signifies time of being mature. A mature person is able to overcome any kind of temptations.

*        The humble and small manger is extended to marginal realities like mountainside where the poor shepherds[8] used to remain keeping guard over their sheep during the watches of the night expounded to the danger of wild beasts and thefts (v 8).

*        The Angel in Hebrew word מַלְאָךְ, “malach” meaning “angel” or “messenger of God” (v 9) announced the Good News to the pastors saying: “Do not be afraid. Look, I bring you news of great joy, a joy to be shared by the whole people. Today in the town of David a Saviour has been born to you; he is Christ the Lord. And here is a sign for you: you will find a baby wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying in a manger” (vv 10-12). In the midst of darkness of fear and poverty shone the light of happiness. The text in which based Luke is in Is 9:5-6.

*        The angel and all hosts of heaven praised God with the words: “Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace for those he favours!” (vv 13-14), it echoes to Is 52:7[9]. The heaven and earth with whole creatures were filled with God’s Spirit and glorify to God, because the very deep creature identity is to live fully, that is the glory of the author of live: God. The life of the pastors, animals and the nature were deeply integrated and close to the source of life (cf. Müβig 2012, p.25).

*        The shepherds said each other: Let us go and see! So they have gone to the “house of bread” Bethlehem and saw Mary, Joseph and the baby wrapped in swaddling lying in the manger (cf. Ws 7:4-5)[10]. In the garden of Eden or “delight place” the situation before fallen was full of admiration “this is bone of my bones, flesh of my fleshes!” and then, looking to hide themselves from the reality as such, they discovered their nakedness. Here the same there is happiness, but especially “to see” not “to hide”, they saw three of them, and number three in the Bible is divine number, they could say “this is so close to our own situation of life – God with us” (Emmanuel). And the shepherds became messenger of the “Good News”: “everyone who heard it was astonished at what the shepherds said to them” (v 18).

*        The little baby, who was found, laying dawn in the merge, continually is shining today’s reality. What was said a little baby would guide to the true peace and harmony of the whole creation. If we do not lost sight that the infancy narrations were to explain the public life of Jesus, so it is enough clear that“He refused at any time to Lord it over men, or to be a King, or to be a Leader, or to be a Reformer, or to be in any way Superior to the creatures. He would be nothing else but their brother, and their counselor, and their servant, and their friend” (Merton 1962, p.293).

*        As we have said, Luke’s Gospel has written in meditative style. Mary, who is a clear expression of regaining woman’s dignity in this gospel[11], “treasured all these things and pondered them in her heart” (v 19). The contemplative attitude from the depths of the heart to the new tree of life and tree of wisdom is an urgent task for our humanity today. Thus “In Mary’s glorified body, together with the Risen Christ, part of creation has reached the fullness of its beauty. She treasures the entire life of Jesus in her heart (cf. Lk 2:19,51), and now understands the meaning of all things. Hence, we can ask her to enable us to look at this world with eyes of wisdom” (LS 241). So from the angels to the pastors, from the shepherds to Mary, and from her to the entire world the Good News shall reach to whole world.

The picture of garden of Eden as background appears in many places in the gospels: Jesus in the wilderness sharing life with wild beasts as already mention above (Mk 1:12-13, Mt 4:1-11, Lk 4:1-13); Jesus in the Olive garden before been capture by violent crowd, here the disciples were not able to keep awake (Mk 14:26.32-42, Mt 26:30.36-46, Lk 22:39-46); the risen Jesus meeting with Mary Magdalene who confused with the gardener (Jn 20:11-18); Jesus recreating the new humanity or community and blowing to his disciples the Spirit and giving peace and happiness (Jn 20:19-23); Risen Jesus sending his disciples to announce the Good News to whole creation (Mk 16:16); and so on.

4. Brief history of the Christmas Crib[12].

The Christmas Crib dates back to St. Francis of Assisi. It was in 1223 that the first Crib was celebrated in the woods of Greccio near Assisi, on Christmas Eve. There lived in that town a man by the name of John (Messier Giovanni Velitta), a very holy man who stood in high esteem.

Francis called upon John about two weeks before Christmas and said to him, “If you desire that we should celebrate this year’s Christmas together at Greccio, go quickly and prepare what I tell you; for I want to enact the memory of the Infant who was born at Bethlehem and how He was bedded in the manger on hay between a donkey and an ox. I want to see all of this with my own eyes.” The man departed quickly and prepared everything that the Francis had told him. The Friars who had come from many communities, gathered around St. Francis as did the men and women of the neighborhood. They bought candles and torches to brighten the night. Francis arrived and saw that everything had been prepared. The crib was ready, hay was brought, the ox and the donkey were led to the spot. Greccio became a new Bethlehem. The crowds gathered and rejoiced in the celebration.

St. Francis, dressed in deacon’s vestments, sang the Gospel. Then he preached a delightful sermon to the people. It is recorded that after the Mass, St. Francis went to the crib and stretched out his arms as though the Holy Child was there, and brought into being by the intensity of his devotion, the Babe appeared and the empty manger was filled with the radiance of the new born.

St. Francis’ idea of bringing Bethlehem into one’s own town spread quickly all over the Christian world, and soon there were Christmas cribs in churches and homes. The Moravian Germans brought this custom to the United Stated. They called it Putz. The oldest known picture is a “Nativity scene” dating from about 380 that was a wall decoration in a Christian family’s burial chamber, discovered in the Roman catacombs of St. Sebastian in 1877.

There is a legend that at midnight on Christmas Eve animals have the gift of speech. This gift was bestowed because the humble farm animals gave the infant Jesus His first shelter, and warmed him with their breath, thus they were rewarded with the gift of human speech.

Conclusion.

Our ecological approach to the three biblical texts has enlightened us to point out some suggestive conclusions. Even though our main material sources belong to different periods of the human history and to different traditions they were enough suitable to help us to rethink our very lifestyle, our interrelation with others, nature and God. The coming points are our humble conclusions:

*        Our humanity in this XXI century is strongly called rethinks the original human identity into the nature, not over all nonhumans. For this endeavor, we need get rid over our mistuning anthropocentrism that harasses our common home from paradise to dying planet; overcome our patriarchalism or androcentrism that marginalize women, in deep sense to assume our nakedness, that may open space to the transformative energy of the Spirit who may bring us to the harmony with whole.

*        The proud hearted and economically powerful have to come down (Lk 19:1-10) and the lowly, poor and our mother earth lifted up (Lk 1:52, 4:18), so that both opposites may meet in the same banquet and the same paradise and share again the real happiness.

*        Christian communities we are invited to reread the Gospels and whole Bible from the ecological[13] or integral perspective and let it transform us our mindset, our relations with the nature and God, our actions making them less destructives but creative and liberating. It is urgent to overcome the culture of margination or exclusion either exclusion of the animals or poor people, because every creature has its dignity to be respected; it means go beyond any cultural, religious prejudices, that still promoting fragmented culture and believes.

Finally, our coming back home start in our personal emptying (kenotic) process of life, that may have social transformative effects as well, thus we can be able to set out the ecological culture:

Ecological culture cannot be reduced to a series of urgent and partial responses to the immediate problems of pollution, environmental decay and the depletion of natural resources. There needs to be a distinctive way of looking at things, a way of thinking, policies, an educational programme, a lifestyle and a spirituality which together generate resistance to the assault of the technocratic paradigm. Otherwise, even the best ecological initiatives can find themselves caught up in the same globalized logic. To seek only a technical remedy to each environmental problem which comes up is to separate what is in reality interconnected and to mask the true and deepest problems of the global system (LS 111).

---

[1] Hendrickx, Infancy Narratives, p. 37 Matthew’s narration on infancy was based in Isaiah 40-55 as Midrash typology. However, R. Brown, Birth, p. 190 suggested different source from Numbers 22-24 on Balaam and Balaq history to represent the Magis and Herd’s intension, might be too the Saba’s Queen in 1K 10:1-3; the history on Joseph in Gn 37-50; history of Mosses and Pharaoh in Ex 1:15; about star in Ex 13:21.

[2] According Michael D. Goulder (1989, p.147) three of the synoptic gospels have narrated the passion, death and resurrection event because liturgical reasons.

[3] To see Spong (1992, pp. 23-26, 91).

[4] The same opinion has Fray Marcos (2016) in his commentary on fourth Sunday of Advent (published in webpage Fe Adulta).

[5] As Wolfhart Pannenberg (1978, pp. 141-150) and Emil Brunner (1952, pp. 352 y ss) pointed out in their written.

[6] Irenaeo, Haer, iii, 21, 10; cited by J. Spong (1992, p. 129).

[7] It is important remember that Luke’s infancy narrative is an instruction to the Jesus’ public life.

[8] Elizabeth Johnson (2011): “shepherds were not considered desirable company. They were poor, illiterate, and thought to be dishonorable because they could not be home at night to protect their women. They were also considered thieves because they grazed their flocks on other people's property. They were outcasts of polite society, usually ranked together with sailors, butchers, camel drivers, and other despised occupations.”

In https://www.workingpreacher.org/preaching.aspx?commentary_id=1157. In the same way Goulder (…256) points out the negative consideration on shepherds.

[9] According Spong (1992, p.96) this is the only place where the recipients not glorifying but the angels.

[10] Even it is not related to historical midrash as a sources for Luke’s narration, in the birth of Kings Mitra and Osiris the there were present the shepherds.

[11] The Magnificat in Luke’s Gospel (1:46-55) is a modelic and prophetic canticle that the author has put in the mouth of Mary.

[12] Read more in http://www.catholicdoors.com/misc/christmascrib.htm

[13] Ecology like economy, ecumenism, etc. comes from Greek word Oikos which means home, house.

Bibliography.

Barry, Robert (2010) Through ecological eyes: reflections on Christianity’s environmental credentials. Mumbai: Saint Pauls Publication.

Brueggemann, Walter (2012). The prophetic imagination. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.

Fox, Matthew (2000). Original blessing. New York: Bear & Company, Inc.

Goulder, Michael D. (1989 Luke, A New Paradigm, vol. 1, Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 20. Sheffield: JSOT Press.

Heger, Paul (2014). Women in the Bible, Qumran and Early Rabbinic Literature: Their Status and Roles. Boston: Brill Open.

Johnson, Elizaveth (2011). Comentary to Lk 2:1-20. In https://www.workingpreacher.org/preaching.aspx?commentary_id=1157

Kosman, Admiel (1998). While Adam slept: Another look at the strange nocturnal doings that brought forth 'woman'. Talmud at Bar Ilan University

Reisenberger, Azila Talit (1993). The creation of Adam as hermaphrodite — and its implications for feminist theology. In: A Quarterly Journal of Jewish Life and Thought Judaism. September 22.

Lieberman Sarah R (1975). The Eve Motif in Ancient Near Eastern and Classical Greek Sources, Ph.D. dissertation. Boston University.

Maly, Eugene (1968). Genesis. In: Brown, Raymond, Fitzmyer, Joseph and Murphy, Roland (Eds). The Jerome biblical commentary. New Jersey: Prentice-hall, Inc. 7-46.

Merton, Thomas (1961). New seeds of contemplation. New York: Abbey of Gethsemani, Inc.

Müβing, Dietmar (2012). Hacia un cristianismo ecológico: Fuentes espirituales para el cuidado de la creación. La Paz: ISEAT.

Panikkar, Raimon (2004). La plenitud del hombre. Madrid: Ediciones Siruela.

(2009). La puerta estrecha del conocimiento: sentidos razon y fe. Barcelona: Herder.

(2010). Teologia de la liberacion y la liberacion de la teologia. En: Vigil, Jose (Coord). Por los muchos caminos de Dios y hacia una teologia planetaria. Quito: Abya Yala.

Pope Francis (2015). Laudato Si. Encyclical letter. Colombo: Claretian Publication.

Prinzivalli, Emanuela (2014). La mujer, lo femenino y la escritura en la tradicion originiana. En Borresen, Elizabeth y Prinzivalli Emanuela (eds). Las mujeres en la mirada de los antiguos escritos cristianos (siglos I-VI). Pamplona: Editorial Verbo Divino.

Spong, John (1992). Jesús, hijo de mujer. New York:  Ediciones Martínez Roca, S. A.

Schüssler, Elizabeth (1989). En memoria de ella: una reconstruccion teologico-femenista de los origenes del cristianismo. Bilbao: Desclee de Brouwer.

Stuhlmueller, Carroll (1968). The gospel according to Luke. In: Brown, Raymond, Fitzmyer, Joseph and Murphy, Roland (Eds). The Jerome biblical commentary. New Jersey: Prentice-hall, Inc. 115-164.

Trible, Phylis   (1973). Depatriarchalizing in biblical interpretation, in: Journal of the American

Academy of Religion, n 41, 30-48.

(1978). God and the Rhetoric of Sexuality. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Wolfhart Pannenberg, Jesus, God and Man, Filadelfia, Westminster, 1978, pp. 141-150. Emil Brunner, The Christian Doctrine of Creation and Redemption, Dogmatics, vol. 2, Filadelfia, Westminster, 1952, pp. 352 y ss.

By - Efrain Vasquez Mamani, cmf

zhengyuanyu66@yahoo.com