Why Was Jesus Born When and Where He Was? - Msgr Pope quoting St. Thomas Aquinas

ADW.org ^ | 13 December 2021 | Msgr Pope

[Cronos]

The Nativity, Lorenzo Monaco (1414)

In preparation for the coming of Christmas, we have been discussing some of St. Thomas Aquinas’ writings. In this last installment we’ll be looking at his commentary on the time and place of Jesus’ birth.

We live in a culture that tends toward a kind of temporal pride. We think that we have come of age, that we are smarter and wiser than our forebears. Scientific, technical, and medical knowledge are more highly developed to be sure, but there is more to life than what falls into those realms.

The religious version of temporal pride is expressed in this utterance: “If Jesus lived in our times, He would …” The sentence is then completed with any view we favor or consider to be “enlightened” and “modern.” Jesus did not choose to live in our time, however, and there may well be good reasons for that. As God, He could have chosen any age—and He did not choose ours.

St. Thomas Aquinas, who lived in the 13^th century, pondered the reasons for the time and place of Jesus’ birth in his Summa Theologica. In it he addressed some of the questions and objections raised during his era.

The time of the Lord’s birth – St. Thomas discussed this in his Summa Theologica, Part III, Question 35, Article 8. He used as his starting point St. Paul’s attestation to the fittingness of the time of Christ’s birth: When the fullness of the time was come, God sent His Son, made of a woman, made under the law (Gal 4:4). Here, the “fullness of time” is understood to mean “at the designated or determined time.” St. Thomas wrote,

Whereas [other men] are born subject to the restrictions of time, Christ, as Lord and Maker of all time, chose a time in which to be born, just as He chose a mother and a birthplace. And since “what is of God is well ordered” and becomingly arranged, it follows that Christ was born at a most fitting time.

St. Thomas responded as follows to objections raised in his day regarding the time of Christ’s birth:

Some objected that because Christ came to grant liberty to His people, it was not fitting that He came at a time when the Jewish people were subjected to Roman occupation and the Herodian dynasty (Herod was not a true Jew). St. Thomas answered that because Christ came in order to bring us back from a state of bondage to a state of liberty, it was fitting that He be born into bondage with us and then lead us out. We can grasp this logic in a wider sense when we consider that He assumed our mortal nature in order to give us an immortal nature; He died in order to restore us to life. St. Thomas, referencing Bede, wrote that Christ submitted Himself to bondage for the sake of our liberty. He also added that Christ wished to be born during the reign of a foreigner so that the prophecy of Jacob might be fulfilled (Genesis 49:10): The scepter shall not be taken away from Juda, nor a ruler from his thigh, till He come that is to be sent. The bondage was not to be ended before Christ’s coming, but after it and through it.

Others objected that the time of year, near the winter solstice, was not fitting for Christ’s birth. They argued that it was not fitting for the Light of the World to be born during the darkest time of the year. Thomas replied that Christ wished to be born at a time when the light of day begins to increase in length so as to show that He came to draw man back to the light, according to Luke 1:79: To enlighten them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death.

The place of Christ’s birth – St. Thomas discussed this in the Summa Theologica, Part III, Question 35, Article 7.

Christ willed to be born in Bethlehem for two reasons. First, because “He was made … of the seed of David according to the flesh,” as it is written (Romans 1:3); … Therefore, He willed to be born at Bethlehem, where David was born, in order that by the very birthplace the promise made to David might be shown to be fulfilled. The Evangelist points this out by saying: “Because He was of the house and of the family of David.” Secondly, because, as Gregory says (Hom. viii in Evang.): “Bethlehem is interpreted ‘the house of bread.’ It is Christ Himself who said, ‘I am the living Bread which came down from heaven.’”

St. Thomas responded to some objections to Bethlehem as the place of Jesus’ birth.

Some argued that Christ should have been born in Jerusalem because it is written (Isaiah 2:3) that “The law shall come forth from Sion, and the Word of the Lord from Jerusalem,” and that because Christ is the very Word of God, made flesh, He should have come into the world at Jerusalem. St. Thomas answered that Christ, as the Son of David, fittingly echoed David’s priestly/kingly role. King David was born in Bethlehem and finished his ministry as priest/king in Jerusalem, so it was fitting that Christ as King be born in Bethlehem and, as true High Priest, die in Jerusalem.

Others argued that Bethlehem was too poor and unseemly a place for the Christ to be born. Thomas responded, [The Lord] put to silence the vain boasting of men who take pride in being born in great cities, where also they desire especially to receive honor. Christ, on the contrary, willed to be born in a mean city, and to suffer reproach in a great city. Thomas added, [And] that we might acknowledge the work of God in the transformation of the whole earth, He chose a poor mother and a birthplace poorer still. He cited Scripture: “But the weak things of the world hath God chosen, that He may confound the strong” (1 Corinthians 1:27).

Still others argued that because Scripture (Matthew 2:23; Isaiah 11:1) said “He shall be called a Nazarene,” Christ should have been born in Nazareth. Thomas easily dispatched this objection by observing that one is not always born where one is raised. He also added (referencing Bede), He wished to be born at Bethlehem away from home…in order that He who found no room at the inn might prepare many mansions for us in His Father’s house.

With St. Thomas to guide and teach us, we have pondered over the past few days some aspects of the incarnation and birth of our Lord. May you who have read and I who have presented be enriched by the teachings of the Lord through the great St. Thomas Aquinas.

Below is a link to an organ prelude on the hymn “Bethlehem of Noblest Cities,” also known as “Earth Hath Many a Noble City.” It is accompanied by beautiful art related to Bethlehem. Here are the words to the hymn:

Earth hath many a noble city;
Bethlehem, thou dost all excel:
out of thee the Lord from heaven
came to rule his Israel.

Fairer than the sun at morning
was the star that told his birth,
to the world its God announcing
seen in fleshly form on earth.

Eastern sages at his cradle
make oblations rich and rare;
see them give, in deep devotion,
gold and frankincense and myrrh.

Sacred gifts of mystic meaning:
incense doth their God disclose,
gold the King of kings proclaimeth,
myrrh his sepulcher foreshows.

Jesus, whom the Gentiles worshiped
at thy glad epiphany,
unto thee, with God the Father
and the Spirit, glory be.

[Cronos]

Mgsr Charles Pope Ping

Please FReepmail me to get on/off the Msgr Charles Pope Ping List.

[nagant]

Yes, Jesus has a thesis statement. He was sent into this world to die as propitiation. It’s the one message of Christianity. If your Christian church doesn’t place it front and center then it isn’t a Christian church.

[fidelis]

Amen.

“ The story of every human life begins with birth and ends with death. In the person of Christ, however, it was his death that was first and his life that was last. The Scripture describes him as “the Lamb slain as it were, from the beginning of the world.” He was slain in intention by the first sin and rebellion against God. It was not so much that his birth cast a shadow on his life and thus led to his death; it was rather that the Cross was first, and cast its shadow back to his birth. His has been the only life in the world that was ever lived backward…from the reason of his coming manifested by his name “Jesus” or “Savior” to the fulfillment of his coming, namely, his death on the Cross.”

“Every other person who ever came into this world came into it to live. He came into it to die. Death was a stumbling block to Socrates — it interrupted his teaching. But to Christ, death was the goal and fulfillment of His life, the gold that He was seeking... The manger and the Cross thus stand at the two extremities of the Savior’s life!... He was laid in a stranger’s stable at the beginning, and a stranger’s grave at the end... He was wrapped in swaddling bands in His birthplace, He was again laid in swaddling clothes in His tomb... It was not so much that His Birth cast a shadow on His life, and thus led to His death; it was rather that the Cross was there from the beginning, and cast its shadow backward to His birth..”.(Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen)

[Wpin]

Thank you for posting this, is very interesting.

[MurphsLaw]

For sure...no doubt
And not just every Church, but every
home should have a Crucifix or Cross
to remind us daily of what Christ has done for us,
and what we must Do for him...

[Jacquerie]

Try reading before posting.

[Zionist Conspirator]

Others objected that the time of year, near the winter solstice, was not fitting for Christ’s birth. They argued that it was not fitting for the Light of the World to be born during the darkest time of the year. Thomas replied that Christ wished to be born at a time when the light of day begins to increase in length

So Jxsus really and truly was born on 12/25, but Adam and Eve are Babylonian mythology.

You people are just weird. There's absolutely no other reason to explain your inconsistencies.

[Cronos]

“You people”??? Many Jews believe Adam and Eve were not real.

The Catholic church does NOT in any way consider them “Babylonian mythology “. And they differ heavily from Babylonian creation myths, which involve the Annunski lesser gods creating humans as a slave race.

The Catholic church considers The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man.

Now you are free to hold it as actual persons or not, but not yo consider it Babylonian myth.

While for Jewish persons

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/genesis-as-allegory/

In the Middle Ages, Saadia Gaon argued that a biblical passage should not be interpreted literally if that made a passage mean something contrary to the senses or reason (or, as we would say, science; Emunot ve-Deot, chapter 7). Maimonides applied this principle to theories about creation. He held that if the eternity of the universe (what we would call the Steady State theory) could be proven by logic (science) then the biblical passages speaking about creation at a point in time could and should be interpreted figuratively in a way that is compatible with the eternity of the universe.

It is only because the eternity of the universe has not been proven that he interpreted the verses about creation at a point in time literally (Guide, II, 25), but he still insisted that the creation story as a whole was written metaphorically (Book I, Introduction).

To Saadia and Maimonides, belief in the truth of the Bible does not require a denial of science (”reason,” “logic”) when the two seem to conflict.

Literalism is not only misleading but is also a disservice to the cause of the Bible itself. It forces the Bible to compete as science, and in such a competition it cannot win. In a scientific age such as ours the Bible will never be accepted as science by educated people.

So, you reject the Rabbinical jewish view?

[Kevmo]

In a scientific age such as ours the Bible will never be accepted as science by educated people.
***Nonsense. Two of our most educated freepers, Betty Boop and Alamo Girl, wrote a book on science and the bible based upon their interactions right here on Free Republic.

Don’t Let Science Get You Down, Timothy: A Light-hearted (but Deadly Serious) Dialogue on Science, Faith, and Culture Paperback – January 27, 2007
by Jean Drew (Author), Sandi Venable

https://www.amazon.com/Dont-Science-Down-Timothy-Light-hearted/dp/1430304693

[Cronos]

You can post that link to the Jewish Orthodox forum website in the earlier post

[skr]

Since God made the arrangements, what’s there to argue about? To debate for debate’s sake is not actually studying Holy Scripture.

I don’t think 12/25 is correct, but what does it matter if God didn’t see fit to have the date written down?

[wardaddy]

You could do worse than A&A

Aquinas and Augustine

[Cronos]

Did you read the article?

[skr]

I scanned it twice. I understand that the author is trying to make a point. My point is that those who are objecting/arguing about the whys and wherefores have no reason to do so. God knows what He’s doing, why would anyone object to Jesus coming when He did or to where He was born?

[Cronos]

Ah, now I get you - you are questioning the questioners :)

For deep believers such as yourself, those questions are silly - and yes, they are.

For strugglers like myself and many who have crossed over to the “I don’t believe” side, these are the silly questions we trouble ourselves over. And yes, we can get too much over “how many angels can dance on the head of a ping”

[delchiante]

Quote
I don’t think 12/25 is correct, but what does it matter if God didn’t see fit to have the date written down?

He did write it down.

Revelation 12:1. The birth of the manchild caught up to heaven.
Born when the sun clothes the woman and the moon under her feet..

His sky has it written above our heads too.

The woman gets clothed with the sun early fall nowadays.
The moon ends up under her feet in the early fall nowadays too.

Science,and the scriptures, show that those stars appear to move in relation to the earth.
So, the woman wasn’t always above Israels head at the fall.
It was above Israel in the summer too.

And the woman,above Israel’s head in the fall today, will be replaced with a Lion above Israel’s head, some time in the future.

That change will bring about a change in the Spring, at Passover.
The 2 Fish above Israel’s head at Passover will change to the Man Carrying a Jar of Water.

Those are not only written above our heads,those are written into the Scriptures.

So,He has assuredly written it down.
The wise men looking for stars and signs may not have been any smarter than any of their contemporaries.

They were just wise enough to know when, and where,to look..

He has written His story in a book and in His Creation.

So, scripture, and study of His Creation (sciemce) could show a late summer or early fall birth.

Would December 25 going away destroy ones faith?
Or just destroy an inherited lie that can now be revealed to be false?

There is a lot invested in December 25.
An entire commercial business ,maybe world wide economy depends on what gets spent in this season.
If all that fell, how would the world react?
Especially the business leaders who try to get into the Black, on Black Friday?