Nativity and Incarnation
Knowing the difference that makes it all
Christianity's silence
Let's start with Ricky Gervais, of stand-up fame.
As sure as the sun rises in the east, round about the high holy days of Christianity's temporal cycle (Easter and Christmas especially) you can count on it, mark time by it, and note the seasons. The anti-Christian article in the popular press is a clearer signal of the beginning of Christian holy time than the stars in the sky as per Genesis 1:14.
So, the Wall Street Journal offers us the silly and shallow thoughts of Gervais, posturing as smug and smart observations on the great quest of the human spirit. The title of this timely piece? "Why I'm an atheist."
Who cares? Who needs to hear his ramblings (sophomoric at best) just now? His focus seems to be that Christians browbeat others into a belief in God with threats of hell. Right! That's the message pouring forth from Christian pulpits these days. Good grief!
Do not misread. I think Gervais has every right to voice his opinion and articulate his views. My issue is with the timing of putting this drivel into print. Right before Christmas.
I think Christians are so used to this type of onslaught that they have grown accustomed to sitting back and taking it. I'm not advocating a fatwa. Just some outrage, some disagreement, some exception-taking to the timing of it all. I think in these recurring circumstances "Turn the other cheek" is trumped by the call to "defend the faith."
Silent no more
I am not alone.
Writing in the December 19th issue of the New York Times Roger Douthat offers some thoughts along these lines in a piece entitled "A Tough Season for Believers." He writes:
"(T)his is also the season when American Christians can feel most embattled. Their piety is overshadowed by materialist ticky-tack. Their great feast is compromised by Christmukkwanzaa multiculturalism."
Referencing two insightful recent books (American Grace, co-written by Harvard's Robert Putnam and Notre Dame's David Campbell and University of Virginia sociologist James Davison Hunter's To Change the World) Douthat soberly observes:
"Religious faith looks more socially beneficial to America than ever, but the institutional Christianity that's historically generated most of those benefits seems to be gradually losing its appeal."
This brings us closer to my point.
Nativity and Incarnation
The Incarnation of Christ has both a beginning and a continuation (not an end.)
A fundamental principle of the Old Testament is the incarnation principle. Most profoundly it is heard in the revelation of the Lord's name to Moses on the mount of the burning bush. Ehyeh asher ehyeh, translated memorably by Buber and Rozenzweig as Ich bin da als der ich da werde sein. I am here as the one who will be there. The mode of God's presence is a promise of his future power.
The shock and scandal, of course, is that this power is seen, via the Christian doctrine of the Incarnation, in a new-born and in the Cross. Power in the weakness of living and also dying out of love. "No greater love is there."
To this, of course, the New Testament adds the astonishing notion that the church is the body of Christ. The church, made up of all those who limp their way to pews and once there all too readily engage in all the world's faults and failings, just like their neighbors; yes, the actual, real, down-to-earth church, the one you know and attend, is the Body of Christ! It continues to make present that power of self-sacrificial love which is the salvation of the world. It continues nothing less than the Incarnation.
Christmas is a time when the tide of temptation to sentimentalize the message runs at such a pace that few can resist, let alone turn it back. "It's for the children." No, it is not. It is for the world. And just so, it is for the church itself.
Incarnation and Nativity
After all is said and done, though, it is about birth. Not just of Jesus, but of "Christ in us."
The time is now for the church itself to be "born again."
Dr. James F. Miller
|