As we enter the season of Advent, I’d like to begin our Advent reflection by first looking at one of the earliest orthodox affirmations of our faith - the Apostle’s Creed.“I believe in God, the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ, God's only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived
by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius
Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried;
he descended to the
dead.
On the third day he rose again;
he ascended into
heaven, he is seated at the right hand of the Father,
and he will
come again to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy
Spirit,
the holy catholic church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the
life everlasting. AMEN.”
One of the earliest orthodox declarations of our faith contains the
affirmation of an ‘Advent mystery.’ “I
believe in Jesus Christ… conceived by the
Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin
Mary.”
Many theologians have wrestled with the affirmation of this ancient
mystery of the virgin birth of Jesus. I
do believe it is both good and healthy to ask questions about anything and
everything that we believe, including our thoughts on subjects, which at times,
are perceived as sacred and untouchable.
Where I believe we begin to threaten that health is in our insatiable
demand for absolute, quantitative, definable, categorical, systematized
answers.
For example, our worldview often demands a mechanized explanation of ‘the
historical facts.’ One common objection
to the virgin birth of Jesus is its conflict with the current understanding of
science. Science currently states that
while the process of virgin birth is possible its occurrences are exceedingly
rare and require a set of extraordinary medical conditions to coincide. Genetically, science appears to state that a
virgin birth could only produce a female child, not a male child. Both science and medical experience state
that the female child produced from a virgin birth would be in very poor health
and not survive long. (As the last
sentence implies, there have been a few cases in modern times of suspected
virgin births, including some genetic testing to attempt to verify.) The end conclusion that many draw from this
type of demanded rigid explanation is that because science doesn’t believe it’s
possible Jesus was not born of a virgin.
Providing further objections is the thought that the story of the virgin
birth is stolen from other religious narratives and later superimposed upon
Jesus. Elements of the Jesus narrative
are thus syncretistic in an attempt to further legitimize claims of deity.
Because of the dominance of these and other thoughts, some theologians
choose to demystify the virgin birth. Explanations for what really happened are offered. The demystified explanations in one way or
another reject the notion of the virgin birth of Jesus being an actual
historical fact. ‘It couldn’t be this so it must be that.’ Don’t get me wrong, I’m not at all
discounting the validity or usefulness of either scientific or various method
criticisms. They can be necessary and
helpful tools. What I am suggesting is
that maybe there is a ‘third option’ beyond what our other tools can offer.
Maybe the scope of ‘reality’ is beyond something that we can currently
see or measure. Maybe there is more at
play than we have capacity to either perceive or understand. I certainly get a similar impression about my
sense of ‘reality’ when I study what Jesus and scripture has to say about the
Kingdom and how different God’s reality is from my own. The last are first? Illogical!
Heaven joining earth?
Incomprehensible! Resurrection
and creation renewed? Seemingly
impossible! Yet this is reality from God’s
point of view.
I love the term ‘mystery of the virgin birth.’ Mystery provides us a framework for embracing
the event that neither does the carnage of squeezing it into our limited boxes
of understanding nor does it blindly accept something out of obedience to
religion.
Christian theology is no stranger to mystery. The Trinity.
The incarnation. The two natures
of Christ. The church spent centuries of
its early years wrestling over those mysteries (and not always in friendly
ways). While we develop some pictures
for imagining these realities, at their core, these realities still remain a mystery. There is something about these things that
surpass our ability to fully know, to fully understand.
Good theology embraces mystery. This
idea has been a core value for the Eastern Orthodox Church and I believe it is
something that we could all benefit by learning from them. The embrace of mystery in our theology humbly
acknowledges our God as being ‘bigger’ (in so many senses of the word) and “other
than” ourselves. It also rightly
acknowledges humanity as the work of the hands of the Creator who transcends
our abilities. Mystery draws us into
worship. We don’t worship God just for
what we do know about him; we worship Him for what we don’t know about Him.
Reflecting on the mystery of the virgin birth of Jesus leaves us with
many questions. (God bless those who
seek to answer them.) Yet, it also
leaves us with the opportunity to embrace the idea that a mysterious and
unimaginably capable God was intimately involved in the advent of His Son,
Jesus for the sake of you and me that we may know the life He destined for us
since the beginning. In Jesus we have a clear revelation of this mysterious God, of whom Jesus declares, “with God, all
things are possible.” (Matt 19:26)
Nice reflection. One of the things about post-enlightenment Western thought is that we've lost some of our capacity to hold conflicting ideas in tension. We want to collapse mystery into certainty. I think it is almost an idol with us. At the very least it prevents us from having the wonder we need to fuel a healthy spirituality. This is a great season to reflect on that.
ReplyDeleteGood words. Thanks, Nathan.
ReplyDelete