The Christian liturgical calendar begins four sundays before Christmas with the season of Advent. Sunday, December 3 was the first Sunday of Advent.
Traditionally, Advent is a season of preparation. The idea, at its simplest, is to tell the story of a woman waiting for her child to be born, to experience through that story a season of waiting, of preparation for something new to begin.
I’m not sure I believe in God.
I hate Christmas.
But I can get into Advent.
Advent grounds us and invites us to breathe deeply before plunging into something new. There’s an old saying – “The heart has reasons whereof reasons knows nothing.” The new year could begin with Christmas, with a time of birth. But it does not. The new year begins with preparation. It speaks of a wisdom of the human heart, a sense that nothing starts on a blank slate. The world is never new, and we are never born into emptiness. Before every birth there is a story and before every child is born, that story must be known, must be told, and must be honored.
Far too many Christians get wrapped up in the baby Jesus and ignore the confused and frightened single, teenage mother who gave birth to him. They miss the drama of a woman who should have been outcast and was not. The real wisdom of the Christian mythological cycle is a wisdom of the human life – from birth into a complicated and dysfunctional family to death, mourning and new beginning. The tale of Jesus, the man of Nazareth, is so much more important than being executed by the Romans.
Jesus, the man of Nazareth, was born, lived, died, in community. People were conflicted at Mary’s pregnancy, then joyous at Jesus’ birth. He had friends, he grew up in family, he was rude to his mother when she called him out in front of his friends, he had women and men who loved him in not so kosher ways. He did things that really weren’t quite appropriate. And when he died, he was mourned by those who loved him, and they were bereft and they had to find a way to go on. And after his death, his friends and family did find a way to go on with their lives. They faced a gap in their lives, they realized that tomorrow is going to shine and you can’t stop living just because of loss and they figured out a way to get on with the business of living.
So far as I’m concerned, the whole Christmas thing is a distraction, an ancillary bit of nonsense that distracts us from what really matters – living in community with one another.
#1 by Bhudda on December 5, 2007 - 10:33 am
Glendon; It is basic right to choose ones community, and the right of a community to reject a person based on values they do not share, old as the hills, though it may still deliver your milk.
I am pretty sure that Joseph was present at Jesus’ birth, at least that is the story, and he was a stand in for Jesus’ dad, who may have been running other errands…so how was Mary a single Mom? Joseph and Mary were betrothed, which despite any controversy about that not being marriage, under old Jewish law, it was a contract, something like a civil union. Please don’t tell me all woman are single Moms.
Now my wife (refer to poster), after I took off and went on my journeys, she was a single Mom. It was an accepted thing to do in my day, seek enlightenment, and it beat changing diapers.
#2 by Glenden Brown on December 5, 2007 - 1:04 pm
If we’re going to discuss the story, let’s talk about the problem of language. In the original Hebrew (in Isaiah for instance), Mary was described as a young girl, not a virgin. That was added when it translated into Greek.
There are also aspects of the story that, to say the least, raise questions. Joseph pops up – considers kicking her cheating butt to the curb then relents in time to provide Mary with a respectable beard for her unwed pregnancy. Then Joseph pretty much disappears from the story.
I would also suggest the evidence for the Immaculate Conception is extremely weak. There’s no reason more valid reason to believe in that than there is to think Mary got caught in the club and Jesus’ later life motivated his followers to use retroactive continuity to support their claims of his divinity.
#3 by Zoroaster on December 5, 2007 - 2:11 pm
Who cares about the version of the story? In any of them Mary isn’t a single mom. Jesus had a “dad”, as in a male figure in his life, and that was Joseph, or the almighty, or so goes the “story”. That holy ghost guy has the best gig.
I have no idea how mohammed was raised, or how he entered the world, as a comparison, though I am certain there is a story.
The flying spaghetti monster though, has origins in the Great Saucebowl in the Sky. Purgatory is where underdone tomato sauced Beef Rolladin are housed, until fully cooked. The devil of this creation is Carbonara Fetticini, which of course is a dairy based sauce, and the source of all blasphemy.
All hail the flying Spaghetti Monster, it is his birthday according to Chef Boyardee.
Jesus is the son of god, so he has a dad. I know it sounds ridiculous, that is the point.
No one references all manner of things in the bible after a a time, other than a mention, then poof. That is why it is called a story. That said making any assumptions about people we never knew that claim immaculate conception, dads in the sky, a son that walks on water, etc. etc. doen’t really lend itself to credible review, in any language.
#4 by caveat on December 5, 2007 - 2:47 pm
Zoro, you’re making my mouth water. And btw I believe the correct spelling is ‘fettucini’.
We used to judge the doneness of our fettucini by throwing a peice at the kitchen wall. If it stuck there, it was done.
#5 by Albert O. on December 5, 2007 - 2:56 pm
Huh?? Are you saying the Bible is a collection of fairy tales, just like the Book of Mormon?? At least Joseph – Jesus’ dad – didn’t wear secret underwear like Mitt “the Flip Flopping Neocon Wannabe” Romney does.
#6 by Glenden Brown on December 5, 2007 - 3:38 pm
I have no problem with the biblical stories being non-factual. That doesn’t mean they lack value.
#7 by Caveat on December 5, 2007 - 3:46 pm
True.
#8 by Albert O. on December 5, 2007 - 4:54 pm
How do a bunch of non-factual biblical stories provide value, other than mere good reading?
#9 by Caveat on December 5, 2007 - 8:17 pm
First of all, any of the old stories / myths have these grains of TRUTH. There really were floods and wars, sacrifice, grace from unexpected quarters, genocides and insurgent conspiracies, as well as martyrdom and nonviolent civil disobedience. None of that is new and probably none of it saw its first incarnation in biblical times. That they were meaningful enough to have been repeated and repeated down through many generations and finally formalized in the bible is sort of neat in alot of ways. There are other antigue texts that are rich as well. The tao te ching is one I find to be a good read. It’s not just old poetry. Who knows, maybe some of the shite that happens in our own age will be part of a text or more likely pod-production of future generations. Think: Work in process, and Messages from the distant past.
#10 by Bhudda on December 5, 2007 - 10:29 pm
Gwendon and Cwav, are you impwying that dere is valuwe in georgies storwy about tewwible weapons of mass destwuction haaabored by saddam insane?, he who meant to destwoy us… another mythical figure of historwy, ‘er ah or fable?
Wemember that he was a baaaaad man, so says the bible of the wun up to his destwuction. Those that fowowwed were of tewwible goodness, of a hohwy vawaiety.
Expwain.
#11 by Caveat on December 6, 2007 - 6:20 am
I was think of the ‘Anti-Midas’, a tyrant who…everything he touched turned to shit. But I’ll grant your notion that future interpretations will certainly have an unpredicted slant.
Right now I’m wondering if my reading of the bible and tao te ching are not simply projections. Heretofore, I’d have found nothing wrong with that. Now I wonder.
#12 by Bhudda on December 6, 2007 - 9:40 am
Try muttering under your breath, from deep within the throat, always worked for me.
#13 by Elmer Fudd on December 6, 2007 - 9:43 am
HEyw, stop dat!! Moom, Bhudda has been chwannewing me!!
Be vewwy quiet, we are hunting wabbits.