Posted on 02/03/2014 1:36:37 AM PST by markomalley
The Feast Yesterday of the Presentation of Jesus was a rich fare. In my homily I did not have time to cover all I wanted to. Frankly, the moment of the Presentation was one of the most dramatic in Biblical history, and yet almost no one noticed. Lets consider this astonishing moment.
The first part of this post is review for those of you who read regularly. To skip to the newer insights goo down to the red line.
Joseph and Mary have ascended to Jerusalem to fulfill two ancient mandates: the Rite of Purification for a woman after childbirth and the Rite of Presentation of their firstborn male child, Jesus. These rites set the stage for a dramatic moment in Biblical history, a moment missed by almost everyone. We shall explore this dramatic moment shortly but first a little background.
Jewish law considered that, after a woman gave birth she became ritually impure for a period. While this seems unjust to us, the Jewish notion was rooted in the flow of blood that occurred in childbirth and just about anyone who came in contact with blood incurred a ritual uncleanness for a period of time. The Book of Leviticus has this to say regarding a woman who has given birth:
The LORD said to Moses, “Say to the Israelites: ‘A woman who becomes pregnant and gives birth to a son will be ceremonially unclean for seven days, just as she is unclean during her monthly period. On the eighth day the boy is to be circumcised. Then the woman must wait thirty-three days to be purified from her bleeding. She must not touch anything sacred or go to the sanctuary until the days of her purification are over. If she gives birth to a daughter, for two weeks the woman will be unclean, as during her period. Then she must wait sixty-six days to be purified from her bleeding. ” ‘When the days of her purification for a son or daughter are over, she is to bring to the priest at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting a year-old lamb for a burnt offering and a young pigeon or a dove for a sin offering. He shall offer them before the LORD to make atonement for her, and then she will be ceremonially clean from her flow of blood.” ‘These are the regulations for the woman who gives birth to a boy or a girl. If she cannot afford a lamb, she is to bring two doves or two young pigeons, one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering. In this way the priest will make atonement for her, and she will be clean.’ ” (Lev 12:1-8).
As you can see, there is a fairly negative concept at work here from a modern viewpoint. A woman becomes ritually unclean by giving birth. This was due not to birth per se but to the flow of blood and/or other fluids at birth. Even more distressing to modern notions is that a woman who gave birth to a daughter was considered ritually unclean for even longer! Alas, it is well that the power of the Church to bind and loose has freed us from this thinking. Keep in mind that this was ceremonial law, not moral law and, hence, the Church is not setting aside immutable moral law in abrogating such notions of ritual impurity.
Obedient to the Law – Nevertheless Joseph and Mary, obedient to law make the dramatic ascent to the Temple, the Son of God carried in Mary’s arms. It is forty days since the birth of the Lord in fulfillment of the Law.
As they ascend the glorious steps to the Temple Mount they also fulfil another requirement of the Law:
You are to give over to the LORD the first offspring of every womb. All the firstborn males of your livestock belong to the LORD. Redeem with a lamb every firstborn donkey, but if you do not redeem it, break its neck. Redeem every firstborn among your sons. “In days to come, when your son asks you, ‘What does this mean?’ say to him, ‘With a mighty hand the LORD brought us out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. When Pharaoh stubbornly refused to let us go, the LORD killed the firstborn of both people and animals in Egypt. This is why I sacrifice to the LORD the first male offspring of every womb and redeem each of my firstborn sons.’ (Ex 13:12-15)
But something even more dramatic takes place here. To understand what it is, let’s look back to 587 BC.
The Babylonians had invaded Jerusalem and the unthinkable had happened. The Holy City was destroyed and, along with it, the Temple of God. Inside the Temple something even more precious than the building had been housed: the Ark of the Covenant.
Recall what the Ark of Covenant was in the Old Testament. It was a box of Acacia wood, covered in gold. Inside it were placed: the two tablets on which God inscribed the Ten Commandments. Also in it was the staff of Aaron, and a vile of the Manna. More importantly, in this box, this ark, dwelt the very Presence of God in Israel. God mysteriously dwelt within, much as is the case today in our understanding of the tabernacle in our Catholic Churches.
The Lost Ark – Incredibly however, the Ark was lost when the Babylonians destroyed the temple and Jerusalem in 587 BC. It was never found again. Some thought Jeremiah had hid it in the Mountains, others that the priests had hastily hid it in the maze of caves beneath the Temple Mount. Others argue it was taken to Ethiopia. But in the end, the Ark had gone missing.
Empty Temple – When the Temple was rebuilt some eighty years later, the Holy of Holies was restored but the Ark was missing. The High Priest still performed the yearly ritual and entered the Holy of Holies, but the room was empty. Some argued for a spiritual presence in the Temple, but in fact the Ark and the certain presence of God were missing in the Temple after 587 BC. The Ark was never found and returned there. Something, someone, was missing. The very Holy of Holies was an empty room, the Ark, and the presence of God it carried were missing: the Ark, the mercy seat, gone. Would it ever be found? Would it ever be returned to the Temple? Would the Holy Presence of God ever find its way to the Temple again?
The ascent to Jerusalem is a steep one. The mountains surround Jerusalem and the City sits up at a higher altitude than the area around it. As the ancient Jews made the climb they sang the psalms of ascent: Psalms 120-134. As Joseph and Mary ascended they too sang the words that instilled joy: I Lift up mine eye to the mountains from whence cometh my help (121)…..I rejoiced when they said to me let us go up to the House of the Lord (122)…..To you O Lord I have lifted my eyes (123)….Like Mount Zion are those who trust in the Lord (125)….Out of the depths I call unto you O Lord! (130)…..Let us enter God’s dwelling, let us worship at the Lord’s footstool. Arise O Lord and enter your dwelling place, You and the Ark of your strength! (132)….Come and bless the Lord, You who stand in the House of the Lord Lift your hands to the Sanctuary and bless the Lord. The Lord bless you from Zion (134).
Singing these songs, Mary carried Jesus. The climb was even more difficult carrying a newborn babe. But the burden was sweet. A final ascent up the stairs to the Temple Mount. Likely they entered on the southern side through the Huldah gates. Going up the steep stairs, through the tunnel in the walls and emerging on to the bright Temple platform above.
God had returned to His Temple. He, and the Ark who carried him, were found. Mary the Ark, carrying Jesus in her arms. Jesus, very God, true God from True God. Yes, God and the Ark had been found and God was once again present among His people on the Temple Mount. Scripture says:
And the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his Temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts. But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? (Mal 3:1-2)
What a dramatic moment. And yet what a remarkable understatement by God! If I were to direct the moment I would have called for trumpet blasts, peals of thunder and multitudes of angels! And everyone would fall to their knees in recognition of the great fulfillment and the great return of God to his Temple.
Yet, it would seem only an elderly Man and woman took any note at all: Simeon and Anna. They alone understood they were in the presence of greatness and beheld the drama of the moment:
Now there was a man in Jerusalem called Simeon, who was righteous and devout. He was waiting for the consolation of Israel, and the Holy Spirit was upon him. It had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he would not die before he had seen the Lord’s Christ. Moved by the Spirit, he went into the temple courts. When the parents brought in the child Jesus to do for him what the custom of the Law required, Simeon took him in his arms and praised God, saying: “Sovereign Lord, as you have promised, you now dismiss your servant in peace. For my eyes have seen your salvation, which you have prepared in the sight of all people, a light for revelation to the Gentiles and for glory to your people Israel.” The child’s father and mother marveled at what was said about him. Then Simeon blessed them and said to Mary, his mother: “This child is destined to cause the falling and rising of many in Israel, and to be a sign that will be spoken against, so that the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed. And a sword will pierce your own soul too.” There was also a prophetess, Anna…Coming up to them at that very moment, she gave thanks to God and spoke about the child to all who were looking forward to the redemption of Jerusalem. (Luke 2)
Yes, here was the dramatic moment awaited for centuries. The ark of God was found (Mary), and God (Jesus) returned to his temple. But only a few noticed. Just a few understood and celebrated.
And what of us? At every Mass Jesus, God himself is present. Yet how many notice? Do they really see him? Or do they see only the human priest and the human elements of the Mass. Do you see? Do you notice? Are you Simeon? Anna? Mary? Joseph? Or are you just among those on the Temple Mount who miss the dramatic moment of God with us?
Unless you believe in the gnostic Gospels, you have already accepted that the Church has the authority to ratify scripture - to say what should be regarded as scripture and what should not.
For those who haven't investigated them - the stuff in some of those Gnostic gospels is pretty whacked out. It's 'scripture' - of a sort. But (oh boy) what scripture.
We must either accept that the Church indeed has authority to declare what is scripture and what is not - or we have no consistent basis for ruling out-of-bounds those weird 'Gospels' that depict Christ baking his friends in an oven, turning bread into birds or being suspended over Jerusalem by his hair.
So does that mean that the Quran is the spiritual equivalent of the Bible?
Well, no. The Bible is ratified by the Church. The Quran has no scriptural standing whatsoever.
Pope John Paul II famously kissed the Quran in an act of diplomacy. Misguided in my opinion, though it is my pious hope that perhaps that act helped bridge an emotional divide and brought some muslims to Christ.
But neither he nor any Catholic believes what Moslems believe. Our one shared concept is Monotheism, and they vehemently deny the Trinity and the divinity of Christ.
But neither he nor any Catholic believes what Moslems believe.
.........................................................
The Pope seems to believe that the Bible and the Quran will both lead you to the same place:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlqgL-hAC-M#t=89
“Sharing our experience in carrying that cross, to expel the illness within our hearts, which embitters our life: it is important that you do this in your meetings. Those that are Christian, with the Bible, and those that are Muslim, with the Quran. The faith that your parents instilled in you will always help you move on.”
>This seems likely to be the Ark referred to in the passage
>that he cited, as Mary appears elsewhere in Revelation
>(clothed with the sun and with the moon beneath her feet).
Now this gets interesting. There is a theory that I have come to believe is true, that the Conception occurred on June 17, 2 BC (Venus and Jupiter merged in the constellation Leo), an amazing conjunction. Virgo the Virgin follows Leo and just after the Conception, the Sun was near the head of Virgo while the crecent moon was at her feet, Aug. 27, 2 BC. Rick Larson has a great video about these astronomical events. I think that the Birth may have occured on April 3, 1 BC, ~nine months later, and the Magi visited later that year (my speculations). There is recent evidence that Herod died in 1 BC, not 4 BC, specifically Dec. 29, 1 BC (lunar ecplipse that night).
Another amazing sign was that on Friday, April 3, 33 AD (Passover), the moon rose that evening engulfed in a total lunar eclipse and appeared blood red. The moon was in the constellation Aries (the Ram), the perfect sacrifice. I find these events to be extremely interesting.
I have no expectation of changing minds who have been programmed to boast they are responsible for the Bible. And then to completely ignore what they claim they own. Why the need for God or His only Begotten Son when the whole doctrine is warped around Mary?
The conception of Christ was in December not the birth, so this date is way off base and Mary went dirty for several months.
That excerpt is rather encouraging.
You can’t see that he was exhorting Muslims to carry their cross and expel the illness within their hearts?
Islam is a rabid death cult. As we know: its members risk death if they become Christians. John-Paul’s message almost reads like a coded message to those many people trapped inside Islam.
It’s pretty obvious what their cross is. I thank God I’ve been spared from it.
>This seems likely to be the Ark referred to in the passage
>that he cited, as Mary appears elsewhere in Revelation
>(clothed with the sun and with the moon beneath her feet).
Oops, need to correct an error.
Now this gets interesting. There is a theory that I have come to believe is true, that the Conception occurred on June 17, 2 BC (Venus and Jupiter merged in the constellation Leo), an amazing conjunction. Virgo the Virgin follows Leo and just after the Conception, the Sun was near the head of Virgo while the crecent moon was at her feet, Aug. 27, 2 BC. Rick Larson has a great video about these astronomical events. I think that the Birth may have occured on April 3, 1 BC, ~nine months later, and the Magi visited later that year (my speculations). There is recent evidence that Herod died in 1 BC, not 4 BC, specifically Dec. 29, 1 BC (lunar ecplipse that night).
Another amazing sign was that on Friday, April 3, 33 AD (Passover), the moon rose that evening engulfed in a total lunar eclipse and appeared blood red. The sun (not moon) was in the constellation Aries (the Ram), the perfect sacrifice. I find these events to be extremely interesting. Larson says something about the alignment, don’t remember the details, sun in Aries, full moon opposite, in Virgo?, the moon blood red and full (it is finished), while the (Conception or Birth) was during a crescent moon (life begins). Pretty neat.
Nothing in Scripture teaches Mary as an ark.
The exaltation of Mary continually exceeds even what God says about her.
In the process, glory is stolen from God.
John the Baptist’s conception took place in June. And John was 6 months in the womb when Mary visited his mother, her cousin Elizabeth. It makes total and complete sense that the ‘light for this world’ would be sent to this earth on the shortest day of sunlight in the Northern Hemisphere.
Taxes and censuses were collected after the harvest, which would make the birth at the end of our September.
**God had returned to His Temple. He, and the Ark who carried him, were found. Mary the Ark, carrying Jesus in her arms. Jesus, very God, true God from True God. Yes, God and the Ark had been found and God was once again present among His people on the Temple Mount. Scripture says:
And the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his Temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts. But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? (Mal 3:1-2)**
Very moving!
That's odd. Most copies of the Bible mention who Jesus's mother was. Have a look in the New Testament. It should be there somewhere.
Mary is the Mother of God. She had a pivotal role in our salvation, just as Eve had a pivotal role in our near-destruction.
In perfect submission to God's word she brought God into the world.
Mary carried God for nine months in her womb and for many years in her arms.
She could indeed be called the Ark: carrying God across the weary desert of pre-Christian history. In that sense the Mosaic Ark pre-figured her, just as the Mosaic sacrifice prefigured Christ's holy and living sacrifice.
Mary is not God. Confused onlookers notwithstanding, no Catholic believes that she is God.
But she is greater than any other created being - above all angels and archangels. The titles we give to her - Ark of the Covenant, Virgin of Virgins, Theotokos and so forth - these all come from her God-given status as Mother of God.
The archangel Gabriel called Mary "Full of Grace". She is depicted in Revelation clothed in the Sun with the Moon beneath her feet. Clearly God wishes her to be treated with respect!
Hope this was helpful.
Clients need me. Good evening, and may God bless us all.
Good point. The Ark of the Covenant is, as the name implies, a vessel carrying the Covenant.
It’s contents were
1) Aaron’s Rod that budded,
2) A Pot of Manna, and
3) The Broken Tablets from Mt Sinai.
On top of the Ark is the Mercy Seat, upon which the blood is shed to atone for sin.
Atop the Ark of the Covenant, facing one another, are the 2 Cherubim, representing God’s Perfect Judgment and His Perfect Righteousness, both which comprise His Perfect Holiness.
His Perfect Righteousness, when faced with anything unrighteous (such as sin), demands Perfect Justice in Judgment of that before it. His Perfect Justice, demands Perfect Righteousness in the Judgment before them. They keep each other in check, always comprising His Perfect Holiness.
Those items in the Ark represent three cases of disobedience to His Plan. The Pot of Manna represents the rejection of His Providence. The rod that budded represents man’s disobedience to legitimate authority. The tablets represent man’s disobedience to His Law.
His Shed Blood atones for these items.
Mary doesn’t fulfill these elements, even if she is righteous.
Indeed. After all according her devotees of her, she shed her blood for our sins as well, and they have quicker recourse to Mary than to the Lord, whose power is all but unlimited, and whose prayers are like commands to Him. Etc .
Good evening? Where art thou?
We must either accept that the Church indeed has authority to declare what is scripture and what is not - or we have no consistent basis for ruling out-of-bounds those weird 'Gospels' that depict Christ baking his friends in an oven, turning bread into birds or being suspended over Jerusalem by his ha
I see: then let us examine your RC compelled logic.
1. So concurring with an entity on some of its judgments means you depend on and must affirm its authority and claims?
2. Presuming you hold Rome is that entity, thus you hold that an infallible magisterium is necessary to authoritatively recognize and establish what is of God and what is not, and so that what it rejects or affirms must be rejected or affirmed by the faithful, if they will be faithful?
And as with how Rome looks toward toward Mary (see above link), Israel looked more to the Ark than what is contained, and the Ark was later captured by the Philistines. (1Sam. 4-6)
And above the Ark was the mercy seat, representing Heaven, upon which two cherubim with raised wings and facing each other, covered the ark. From this place between the two cherubim God would to speak to Moses. (Ex. 25:17-22)
And thus rather than Mary, the Ark best represents Christ, gold representing His glory, as Christ is the brightness of God's glory, and the express image of His person, (Heb. 1:3) and who contained the law and the words of life, and the rod of God as did the Ark. (Heb. 9:4) And by whom God spoke to man, as the word was made flesh, taking on the common “wooden” body of man, but as John said, “we have beheld his glory His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.” (Jn. 1:14)
But being judged according to outward appearance, He was taken by the enemy and crowned with thorns, only to return to His own, and will return, crowned as Lord and Savior. (Rv. 19:12)
And it is in Christ that believers have direct access to commune with God. Heb. 10:19) The fact that Christ came through Mary does not justify the focus being on her with its aforementioned type of exaltation any more than on Israel, of whom Christ came. (Rm. 9:5)
In addition, as for a place of gold, the Ark can be said to represent the New Jerusalem, which city will be pure gold, and is decked with gold, and precious stones, and pearls. (Rv. 18:16; 21:8,21)
As for a women so bestowed with gold, the only women in the N.T. covered with gold is “the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth:” "And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication: " (Revelation 17:4)
“Good point. The Ark of the Covenant is, as the name implies, a vessel carrying the Covenant.
It’s contents were
1) Aaron’s Rod that budded,
2) A Pot of Manna, and
3) The Broken Tablets from Mt Sinai.
“
.................
EXCELLENT explanation why the simplistic and false adoration of Mary is wrong in this context. You did a great job in few words.
It was not only not helpful, it is false.
First I commend to you the simple explanation here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3118659/posts?page=34#34 as to what the Ark was and why Mary was not those things.
Mary was not the “mother of God”. Mary provided the human dna for the Son of God.
Mary did not “bring God into the world”. God has always been everywhere by nature. God the Father brought His Son into the world. He used Mary.
“She could indeed be called the Ark:” - you could call her a garage too, but that would not make her a garage.
“In that sense the Mosaic Ark pre-figured her, just as the Mosaic sacrifice prefigured Christ’s holy and living sacrifice. “ - No where does Scripture call her a pre-figurement or type. You can look at clouds and see a horsey, but the cloud is not a horsey.
“But she is greater than any other created being - above all angels and archangels. The titles we give to her - Ark of the Covenant, Virgin of Virgins, Theotokos and so forth - these all come from her God-given status as Mother of God. “
1. She is not greater than any other created being. God does not say so.
2. You spoke correctly when you wrote, “The titles we give to her” because humans have perverted what God said to make it say more. God never gave her those titles.
3. God never even called her Mother of God.
“The archangel Gabriel called Mary “Full of Grace”. She is depicted in Revelation clothed in the Sun with the Moon beneath her feet. Clearly God wishes her to be treated with respect! “
He didn’t call her “Full of Grace” as a title. He stated she was highly favored as a recipient of God’s grace.
Revelation does not reveal Mary as clothed with the Sun and the Moon beneath her feet. This is not Mary.
God treated Mary with Grace.
Catholics and Orthodox make too much of what God said. Protestants often make too little.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.